In my recent interview with Papi Chulo, I was asked a question by Papi Chulo about my feeling on the popularity of bareback sex in gay porn.
Since answering that question, I have since mentioned the film, "Bareback GangBang Nr.1", and how it turns me on. With that being the case, I thought now was as good a time as any to address the issue of barebacking in gay porn on this blog.
I have tackled the issue of barebacking before in a blog post I did for Pitbull's ThugPornBlog entitled, "Why We Bare The Risk" back in December 2007, but I don't believe I have ever done it here. So I felt if I'm willing to tackle controversial issues like gay-for-pay and racism in gay porn, why with my now increased popularity since that post for Pitbull, should I sit on my hands on an even more controversial matter. I believe to not address it at some point in some way would be hypocritical of me.
First off, I continue to stand behind the reply I gave to Papi Chulo's question. Combine that response, my blog post for Pitbull on barebacking, and my mention of condom use in my blog posts, I am obviously an advocate of safer sex. But I am well aware that we are all adults and are going to do whatever we want to do, even if that means taking a big risk for that quick sexual fix.
My viewing of bareback porn as I'm sure of anyone else who practices safer sex yet views barebacking porn is viewing it for the fantasy of living in an utopia - a world free of HIV/AIDS and other STDs. Plus, I'm looking at it from the prospective of someone in the industry who knows that porn actors in barebacking films are put together because they either share the same status, OR have made it clear, that regardless of status, barebacking is what they want to do, eleviating the studio of any responsiblity.
Watching porn nowadays from that viewpoint makes me aware of the responsiblities of all involved (like the directors and performers) have to each other and the public. With barebacking porn, the responsibility is solely on the viewer as to whether they want to imitate that art. THAT'S WHAT DISCLAIMERS ARE FOR - it shows the responsibility that a producer/director of barebacking porn has to the public. So one claiming that their disdain for barebacking porn is for the sake of protecting gay youth is admirable, but considering how nowadays teenagers are aware of the existence of many diseaeses (especially HIV) that they can catch by having sex without a condom before they leave the 8th grade ----such a reasoning is insulting to their intellect. Because the gay youth know it's a movie. They know condom use is a matter of choice. They know it's 2 or more guys put together to be into each other, therefore just like any other movie, a teenager knows that there may be other factors in play as to how those guys in a scene came together that we might not be able to see on the surface. Once again, THAT'S WHAT DISCLAIMERS ARE FOR. For instance, maybe they're constant fuck-buddies off-camrea, or maybe they're a real-life couple, but most importantly, the status of all performers involved is most often discussed beforehand. Whatever the case, in making barebacking porn, there are obviously factors that can make bringing a scene to life not so cut and dry.
And I know some are going to actually be dumb enough at this point to try to argue a point of how doing a straight guy is also a fantasy, so why do I have such a loathing for gay-for-pay actors, but not for barebacking performers?
Easy to explain.
Gay-for-pay, unlike barebacking in porn is very cut and dry, because totally straight men don't have sex with men PERIOD. Like I said - cut and dry. Because unlike condom use, sexual orientation is NOT a matter of choice. I've written enough posts on gay-for-pay in the past that I don't need to divert further from the issue of barebacking at this time. If you want to argue the subject of "gay-for-pay" further ---- look it up, so my posts will shut you up.
I think I've said all that needs to be said for those who practice safer-sex yet view barebacking porn. I believe over the past 2 days that I've pointed out the reason why scrutiny and finger-shaking at viewers of barebacking porn is improper behavior, therefore the viewers should be allowed to watch it guilt free as I most certainly do, will continue to do so, and hope that all of you who watch it will do the same.
Since answering that question, I have since mentioned the film, "Bareback GangBang Nr.1", and how it turns me on. With that being the case, I thought now was as good a time as any to address the issue of barebacking in gay porn on this blog.
I have tackled the issue of barebacking before in a blog post I did for Pitbull's ThugPornBlog entitled, "Why We Bare The Risk" back in December 2007, but I don't believe I have ever done it here. So I felt if I'm willing to tackle controversial issues like gay-for-pay and racism in gay porn, why with my now increased popularity since that post for Pitbull, should I sit on my hands on an even more controversial matter. I believe to not address it at some point in some way would be hypocritical of me.
First off, I continue to stand behind the reply I gave to Papi Chulo's question. Combine that response, my blog post for Pitbull on barebacking, and my mention of condom use in my blog posts, I am obviously an advocate of safer sex. But I am well aware that we are all adults and are going to do whatever we want to do, even if that means taking a big risk for that quick sexual fix.
My viewing of bareback porn as I'm sure of anyone else who practices safer sex yet views barebacking porn is viewing it for the fantasy of living in an utopia - a world free of HIV/AIDS and other STDs. Plus, I'm looking at it from the prospective of someone in the industry who knows that porn actors in barebacking films are put together because they either share the same status, OR have made it clear, that regardless of status, barebacking is what they want to do, eleviating the studio of any responsiblity.
Watching porn nowadays from that viewpoint makes me aware of the responsiblities of all involved (like the directors and performers) have to each other and the public. With barebacking porn, the responsibility is solely on the viewer as to whether they want to imitate that art. THAT'S WHAT DISCLAIMERS ARE FOR - it shows the responsibility that a producer/director of barebacking porn has to the public. So one claiming that their disdain for barebacking porn is for the sake of protecting gay youth is admirable, but considering how nowadays teenagers are aware of the existence of many diseaeses (especially HIV) that they can catch by having sex without a condom before they leave the 8th grade ----such a reasoning is insulting to their intellect. Because the gay youth know it's a movie. They know condom use is a matter of choice. They know it's 2 or more guys put together to be into each other, therefore just like any other movie, a teenager knows that there may be other factors in play as to how those guys in a scene came together that we might not be able to see on the surface. Once again, THAT'S WHAT DISCLAIMERS ARE FOR. For instance, maybe they're constant fuck-buddies off-camrea, or maybe they're a real-life couple, but most importantly, the status of all performers involved is most often discussed beforehand. Whatever the case, in making barebacking porn, there are obviously factors that can make bringing a scene to life not so cut and dry.
And I know some are going to actually be dumb enough at this point to try to argue a point of how doing a straight guy is also a fantasy, so why do I have such a loathing for gay-for-pay actors, but not for barebacking performers?
Easy to explain.
Gay-for-pay, unlike barebacking in porn is very cut and dry, because totally straight men don't have sex with men PERIOD. Like I said - cut and dry. Because unlike condom use, sexual orientation is NOT a matter of choice. I've written enough posts on gay-for-pay in the past that I don't need to divert further from the issue of barebacking at this time. If you want to argue the subject of "gay-for-pay" further ---- look it up, so my posts will shut you up.
I think I've said all that needs to be said for those who practice safer-sex yet view barebacking porn. I believe over the past 2 days that I've pointed out the reason why scrutiny and finger-shaking at viewers of barebacking porn is improper behavior, therefore the viewers should be allowed to watch it guilt free as I most certainly do, will continue to do so, and hope that all of you who watch it will do the same.
Tré,
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting subject, and between the three blog comments (MOC, Papi, and here) your opinion on the matter is crystal clear.
Of course, yet again, you are exactly right. I appreciate what IML are attempting to do, and the message that they are attempting to send, but it's quite wrong.
As a medical researcher, I find the culture of barebacking quite interesting. I am a huge advocate of safe sex, but enjoy watching bareback porn a lot. Fact is, most would actually be quite surprised at the ACTUAL statistics (stati-sex? Sorry... bad pun) on getting HIV from unprotected sex.
The most at-risk unprotected sex (acting as the 'receptive' partner, with the other person having a viral load about as high as it gets) will only give you about a 0.5-1:100 chance of actually catching the virus.
Now, of course, that's MUCH higher than 0:100 - but it's a LOT lower than most anticipate the statistics to be.
Fact is: HIV is much harder to get than most people think. While it only takes one encounter to contract the virus, you're really not likely to get it from any given encounter.
HIV is a very fragile virus. The magic receptors gp 160 and 120, and CD4 are easily damaged in transfer, and even in a drop of blood outside of the body, HIV is quickly killed at room temperature after about 20 mins (so a pool of blood on the floor would be essentially HIV free after an hour).
In short, bareback sex, while largely responsible for the increase in recent (~5 years), this is a behavior which everyone makes based on their own convictions and morals, and frankly, it's disappointing to see some try to preach to the crowd.
I do, however, have more personal trouble with people who KNOW that they are HIV positive have unprotected sex with others that are HIV positive - for the simple reason that you most certainly can make your medical life a WHOLE lot more complicated by contracting more than one strain of the virus. It's not clear that they understand this, and so it bothers me on a personal level to know that it's going on. Of course, it doesn't change my opinion of it - you choose what you wanna choose - but it pains me to know that they might be actually substantially reducing their quality and quantity of life by doing it.
On a different note, I am sorry I haven't been able to write lengthy replies to some of your other blog posts, even though I have enjoyed reading them immensely.
Yours,
The Doc (who, for the record is a doctor of Chemistry/Biochem... and will happily answer any book-related questions on HIV, but knows next-to-nothing on the details of the social stuff. That's not something I excel at.)