A too-familiar story
EDITORIAL
Matt Mills / Toronto / Thursday, May 20, 2010
Share |

You are born a boy into a rural community in early 1989. As you hit puberty, somewhere around the turn of the millennium, you start to obsess about boys.

There is a passing and cryptic mention of “homosexuality,” as the gym teacher calls it, at school. He looks so uncomfortable talking about it that all the kids laugh. You laugh along too, but your face flushes, your ears turn red. You know people don’t really talk about homosexuals; people talk about fags: they’re sexual deviants, weaklings, perverts, child molesters and most of them have AIDS or will get it — and die from it — eventually.

In 2006 you’re 17. You’ve come to accept that you dig dudes, and not just in a bromancing kind of way. You’re gay, you guess.

You finally decide to flee. The city is a bit overwhelming at first, but you find a cheap place to live. You discover the gay strip. You even manage to get into a gay bar one Saturday night.

There, a beautiful, beautiful guy chats you up. He’s in his late 20s and seems to want to show you around. He’s the hottest guy you’ve ever seen in the flesh. You can’t believe your luck: he’s so nice to you, he hangs on every word you say, he buys you drinks and tells you you’re hot.

He invites you back to his place, just to smoke a joint. You’re nervous but you go. You want to go. One thing leads to another and you’re having sex for the first time. You’re terrified about catching an STD, especially AIDS, but he tells you he’s “clean,” that there’s nothing to worry about, that he doesn’t have any condoms, that it feels so much better without them anyway.

When it’s over, he says he’s tired and that he’s got work in the morning. He doesn’t give you his number but says he’ll see you around.

The next morning, when you’re sober, you start to think about it. You tell yourself you should have insisted on a condom. You promise yourself you won’t do that again. 

But it’s too late. You test HIV-positive. You go through all the stages of grief. After a while you pick up the pieces and start over. You meet other guys — some really great ones — and you fall in love, again and again. You have great sex, safer sex. Usually, when you tell potential partners that you’re HIV-positive they get scared off before they even get to know you. So, most of the time you don’t mention it.

Then one day, when you’re 22, the cops show up at your door. They arrest you. They issue a media release with your name and picture on it telling the world that a sex predator is on the loose. They’re looking for anyone who might have come in contact with you. Your face, name and HIV status are in all the papers.

The community is abuzz that you are a sexual predator; that you have been deliberately trying to infect people with HIV. It turns out that one of your friends — who says you stole his boyfriend — called the cops on you, saying he had unprotected sex with you and that you didn’t tell him you’re HIV-positive. He says it’s only pure dumb luck that he didn’t seroconvert because of it. His name is never published because the court protects him, but news reporters follow you around for years.

You’re 27 by the time your case comes to trial. While you wait it’s hard to hold a job. You can’t hold a lease on an apartment because you don’t know if you’ll be in jail. You don’t have money for a lawyer. Many of your friends won’t talk to you anymore. You have so many secrets.

Finally, it’s over. Maybe you’re acquitted, maybe the charges against you are stayed, maybe you’re convicted. Regardless, the stigma doesn’t go away. It stays with you forever.

This reality — and others like it — has been repeated for HIV-positive gay men time and time again since 1999. It’s an abstract illustration of why the criminalization of HIV is so incredibly problematic. And it’s why each of us must take full responsibility for our own sexual health.


Share |


Reader Comments


 
Yes
Thanks for humanizing gay guys with HIV the way we deserve but so far no one wants to do. One more point to add to this scenario. The guy whose HIV was passed on to the young man in this scenario very likely didn't actually know he had it yet either.
Rodger, Toronto ON
05/20/10 11:00 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
I wasn't sure where you were going with this...
I wasn't sure where you were going with this but it is very well done. I agree we all have to take care of ourselves. A friend recently seroconverted and he's still so angry and looking for blame that he can't see that he was one of two people that night. I can't blame him though, it took me years to deal with the anger and that it was a lack of insistance that mitigated my own seroconversion. Oddly, coming to terms with that helped me to move on.
anon, Toronto ON
05/31/10 12:44 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Responsibiity
Assume everyone is HIV positive and act accordingly. We are all solely responsible for our own health. It sickens me that lazy anti-gay cops trying to justify their pay have aligned with vindictive shrill holier-than-thou gays to attack the HIV positive.
ron, Vancouver Bc
05/31/10 8:49 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
RE: ron
That's because their are HIV positive people out there that don't care about anyone else's health and will go about knowingly infecting other people either for disregard for their health or literally to infect people. And to point out, the cops aren't "anti-gay", like you and every I-dealt-with-homophobia-in-my-life-therefore-everyone-is-a-homophobe-if-they-don't-side-with-me. Many people, queer and straight, have HIV and would targeted. Aziga was straight, yet the police charged him. Clearly being responsible for one's own health doesn't work. Be responsible for your own health AND your partner's health to ensure nothing bad happens. If it takes "two to tango" then infection is caused by two and should be controlled by two.
Brad, Toronto ON
06/01/10 2:00 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
You're not helping, Brad
Brad says "[there] are HIV positive people out there that don't care about anyone else's health and will go about knowingly infecting other people either for disregard for their health or literally to infect people." This is what everyone thinks most people with HIV are like, when the tiniest minority of people are like that, and the unjust law's sweeping net has wrecked the lives of many poz people who are no such sociopaths (and who have been charged, exposed and even convicted even if they were not involved in anyone's seroconversion). He says "being responsible for your own health clearly doesn't work," but nothing he says backs that up. I'm tired of people spreading the stereotype of the reckless poz murderer and using that to justify legal practices that have fucked with innocent people. Innocent poz people. The fact that the very notion of "innocent poz people" boggles people's minds is the biggest part of the problem.
Bard, Toronto ON
06/01/10 7:45 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
RE: Bard
When I said "there are HIV positive people out there...", I didn't mean everyone who is poz - I meant that there are SOME poz people who don't care for other people's health. Isn't it like 95% of people do care, but there's 5% who don't? Even though that group is small, they still do exist. --- Considering people are still contracting HIV, I think it's safe to assume that I do not need to justify that being responsible just for one's own health is not working. What if someone decides that they don't care about their own health and participate risky sex? Their partner could refuse sex or be responsible for their own health, but why not use protection (if you do choose to have sex with them) for the sake of your partner so that if you have anything and are unaware of it, you don't transmit it to them. I'm sure you agree that no one deserves to become infected, regardless of their bad choices their lives. --- There are many innocent positive people, and yet there are still some who are not so innocent who engage in risky behaviour (i.e. unprotected sex) and KNOW their serostatus and KNOWINGLY infect people with HIV or any other STI, whether or not it is their true intention to infect the other person. --- The man who was outed in BC recently though he was innocent is awful and unfortunate. But what of Aziga? And what if Boone of Ottawa is charged because he is found guilty? Media focuses on the guilty minority which paints a bad picture of other poz people. --- Maybe only a few poz people knowingly infect others, but by no means should they be declared innocent and be allowed to go on doing what they have been doing.
Brad, Toronto ON
06/01/10 8:28 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Thanks
Brad, thanks for clarifying that such people are likely a small minority in relation to poz folks overall (exactly as the vast majority of queers are not compulsive stranglers, but a minority probably is). I wish the many people making your valid point would include that really critical caveat from the outset. That point is often under-emphasized, as is the reality that most HIV is transmitted by people who don't know they have it, and the medical observation that those people undiagnosed and untreated people are the ones who are way, way, way more physically *capable* of successfully transmitting HIV than those on treatment.
Bard, Toronto ON
06/01/10 8:50 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Maybe
Knowingly spreading HIV is criminal and should be dealt with accordingly. Zero sympathy for liars with a hardon.
Craig, Toronto ON
06/09/10 5:10 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Comments from a poz man
I believe it's important to understand there is no black or white on this issue, for either side. The law as it stands is opaque, and I think this leads to these kinds of situations. The law should be clearcut on HIV and prosecution, and in my opinion there is one way to go. Disclosure is mandatory for unprotected intercourse only. It is clear that the risk of infection in other situations does not rise to the standard that would warrant prosecution, as the recent case in Vancouver evinced. But let's also be clear on another thing, that if you're HIV+ and have unprotected sex without disclosure you should be prosecuted. Should it carry the penalties it does now? They seem too severe. Should disclosure in a bathhouse to someone who is wildly practicing bareback sex be treated somewhat differently to a long-term relationship? Probably. But I fail to see, and this is coming from a young poz man, why it can be deemed ethically or legally permissible for someone to knowingly expose someone to HIV via unprotected sex? The use of a condom is not a burden too high to bear. Otherwise, the young man in this article would be just as objectionable to the man who infected him in the first place when he was young. It is precisely because young men are so vulnerable and naive that we need the law to protect him. Take responsibility for your own sexual health, but also take responsibility for your HIV status.
John Doe, Toronto Ontario
06/13/10 12:18 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
criminalizing HIV non-discussion not simple...
John Doe, when 2 people have unprotected sex without discussing serostatus, they both made a mistake. Poz people sometimes slip up, and it's because they are human. Should they be strung up in the media and tossed in jail? Then the poz person is punished for their mistake but the neg person is rewarded for their mistake. Maybe if we took jail and trial-by-media 100 percent out of the equation, and instead looked at counselling to support better choices, everyone would win. Maybe without the media circus, the stereotype of reckless people with HIV would die off. People with HIV are just like those without: human. But when mutual mistakes are made, they are the only ones targeted. And that's a shame.
Injustice, Toronto ON
07/23/10 12:01 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
excellent
demonizing the HIV POZ guys...excellent...next we'll put them in a train...you know...excellent. What a bunch hate driven bull twaddle.
tim, toronto on
07/23/10 1:31 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.