the Bug chasers. i got a 97 on it. it seems undeserved for some reason, but maybe i’m a better writer than i think i am. I know there are a few errors, but i honestly don’t feel like editing them. I already got a grade on it. Oh, and keep and mind I did this at 11PM the night before it was due. Oh, and i just realized that there’s like a smiley in there. I guess the wordpress automatically made that when i was citing the sources in the text. Well here it is:
Actively seeking a substance of any kind that can kill an individual is too uncommon. Humans put themselves in unnatural positions that prove to be dangerous. Humans drink, smoke, do drugs, drive at high speeds, engage in dangerous recreation activities, engage in casual sex and simply do irrational things that are pose dangers to not only their health but also their lives. Of course these activities are justified by humans telling themselves that they are engaging in these activities responsibly and safely. So humans do all these things safely and responsibly and so there is no major outcry against most of these activities. Sex is one of the exceptions. Most people would not want to subject themselves to the dangers of unsafe sex and the consequences that follow them such as STD’s, unwanted pregnancies and HIV/AIDS. So it perplexes the mind that some gay men go against the rationalization of protecting themselves in sex in an attempt to become infected with HIV/AIDS.
Bareback sex is commonly known as unprotected anal sex between two gay males. (Tomso, 2004) However, it is important to know that bareback sex is unprotected sex between two individuals but is most commonly associated with gay men and anal sex. (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999) It is also important to know that engaging in bareback sex does not indicate a desire to become infected with HIV/AIDS or other STD’s. Those gay men who do actively seek to become infected are known as “Bug Chasers”, and those who aim to infect the chasers are known as “Gift Givers.” (Bauermeister and Carballo-Dieguez, 2004; Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999; Tewksbury, 2006; Tomso, 2004) It truly perplexes the mind and shocks most individuals who learn that there are those out there who actively seek to become infected with something that cannot be cured. It is also surprising that there are those who are willing to infect others who seek the virus even though the givers are well aware of what it means to be infected with the virus. So of course the question exists and runs through the minds of researchers and of those who are aware of this phenomenon of “Why?” Forsyth and Gauthier attempt to answer the question and propose four possibilities.
The first reason behind bug chasing is “Fear and Relief.” (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 94) Part of the coming out process involves realizing that there are dangers and risks associated with being homosexual such as social stigmas, reactions from family members and of course HIV/AIDS. It’s the risk of HIV that is perhaps on the mind of most gay men who are out and actively engaging in sexual behavior. The fear can cause so much anxiety that it may impair some men and prevent them from engaging in any sexual activity, which is no way to live. For some of these men, the fear has lowered “their perceived quality of life…to unacceptably low levels.”(Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 94) In an effort to take back their lives they view HIV as “’the great inevitable’” (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 94) and go and seek the virus to reduce their anxiety and live in an “uninhabited fashion.”(Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 94) They do know that HIV is incurable, but they also know that there have been great strides in the treatment and management of the virus. So they believe that they can still maintain a high quality of life if they do become infected, (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999)
Similar to those who actively engage in dangerous activities for the thrill of it, some chasers find that seeking HIV/AIDS is high erotic and thrilling. They believe that “the most captivating quality of the sex act is its irrationality. Safe sex …negates that possibility. (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 94) This is not an isolated sexual act in the sense that risk and danger are enticing to some people. One common form of an extremely dangerous sex act is autoerotic asphyxiation. This is the act of hanging oneself and going in and out of consciousness while masturbating in order to increase the intensity of the orgasm. Many people have suffocated from this act but it still continues to be a popular act. Forsyth and Gauthier also mention that sadomasochism is also a dangerous sexual act, but it’s not. S&M as it is popularly known as is more about control and trust rather than actual pain or torture. It’s about giving oneself in the control and trust of another human being as opposed to risking one’s life. The simulation of pain and torture that is associated with S&M is much different than seeking a virus that will kill and individual.
Another part of coming out is finding a sense of community and breaking free from loneliness. Wanting to belong is part of the human experience for everyone, and being gay makes that much more difficult since there is a social stigma associated with being gay. Many of the bug chasers have the need to belong not only within the general gay community, but also within the HIV positive community. As Forsyth and Gauthier state, “The loss of solidarity and sense of community is overwhelming, particularly for individuals ensconced in a nation already divided.”(Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 95) Chasers also seek the perspective that many HIV positive individuals experience “’You go through this amazing kind of transformation. You look at things…in a powerful new way.’” (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 96) This is similar to being a minority of any sort; only those who experience the status of being a minority in a society are forced to look at the world differently than those who go through it unchallenged.
A final reason for bug chasing is a political one. As Forsyth and Gauthier state, “Still other bug chasers behave in this way because they see the behavior as a politically charges action in response to the larger, homophobic culture that has stigmatized gay individuals as a whole and especially HIV positive gay individuals as outcasts.” (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 96)
Other reasons men engage not only in bug chasing and gift giving but barebacking in general, is because many of them find safe sex to be “pretend sex” (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 91) Other individuals saw bareback sex as “more enjoyable than sex with condoms…[and] conferred and sense of freedom…and…a personal and social responsibility.” (Bauermeister and Carballo-Dieguez, 2004, 2) Another reason men engage in bareback sex in reaction to the safe sex campaigns. Being told to use a condom every time can be perceived as an “absolutist” attitude and thus there are those who wish to rebel against it. (Bauermeister and Carballo-Dieguez, 2004, 3)
There two main attitudes about barebacking, those who are for it and those against it. Here I will discuss different attitudes that people have for it. The simplest and most obvious attitude is that bareback sex is enjoyable. As I sated, one individual felt sex with a condom was fake. Interviewees as Bauermeister and Carballo-Dieguez report state sex with condoms is “’pointless’…and… ‘unnatural.’” (Bauermeister and Carballo-Dieguez, 2004, 7) For one individual bareback sex was “one of the few benefits of being ‘bugged.’” (Bauermeister and Carballo-Dieguez, 2004, 8) However, even though it may seem that there is no risk involved in bareback sex if two people are infected with HIV/AIDS, it is most certainly not the case. Engaging in condom less sex when infected is risky and dangerous because a new more powerful strain of HIV may develop that is resistant to medication. Also, if one contracts an STD, he will be less able to heal from it and may speed up his own death. Some interviewees also believed that bareback sex was not that dangerous. They believed that most HIV positive individuals only had sex with each other. (Bauermeister and Carballo-Dieguez, 2004) Now that some of the motives and attitudes around bug chasing and bareback sex have been discussed, another question comes into play: What are the characteristics of bug chasers?
A study done by Tewksbury of a website devoted to gay male sex hook-ups showed that among others, there are five main characteristics that bug chasers have. The first is age. Men in their early to mid thirties are most likely to be bug chasers. And for every year they are older they have about .065 lower odds of being a bug chaser. The second was race. Most chasers were white; about 82% of bug chasers were white. The last three had to do with physical appearance. Men with piercings were less likely to be chasers, as were men who showed a photograph of their face on this website (even though most profiles features pictures of other body parts.) Finally, most chasers had shorter penises than others. (Tewksbury, 2006) The study, since it was based on self reported information that was found on profiles located on the website, obviously cannot discuss or even truly know about personality traits that chasers or givers have. This is especially true since any information about a person on the site may not have been true since most people do not tell the truth online. One trait that was surprising among chasers was the fact that on their profiles, they did not specify whether they wanted a positive or negative partner. (Tewksbury, 2006)
It is important to note that barebacking and bug chasing are not inherently bad things. Although they are viewed as deviant (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999) as sociology tells us, no act is deviant in itself; it becomes deviant only because we say it is. Albeit they are extremely risky and dangerous, but any sexual activity, especially anal intercourse (Baur and Crooks, 2008), is not without its risks. In an article by Tomso, he confronts the issue of bug chasing and barebacking and especially confronts the research done by Forsyth and Gauthier. In the Forsyth article, they mention that the internet has made the possibility of fining a chaser or giver much easier and “provide[s] links between like-minded individuals.” (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 87) Tomso interprets this to mean “the internet facilitates such ‘behavioral exchanges’” (Tomso, 2004, 99) Obviously the internet had made communication between anyone much more easier and accessible, and yes, an individual may be more likely to partake in an action because of it, but to say that the internet is the reason they partake in it is simply not true. It’s almost obvious that anyone who has ever thought of bug chasing did not think of it simply because of the internet, but rather used it as a tool to find information and others who are the same. He also takes on the article again in reference to self destructive behavior. Forsyth and Gauthier refer to bug chasing as “suicide” (Forsyth and Gauthier, 1999, 95) and rightfully so. Contracting a virus with no cure that not only can but will kill an individual is suicide. Tomso interprets this to mean that any unsafe sex act is equated to suicide. (Tomso, 2004) This is obviously not the case. He goes even further to say that Forsyth “reduce[s] the meaning of sex to seeking death.” (Tomso, 2004, 103) Barebacking, an unsafe sex act, does not mean at all that the individual is seeking death. He fails to take into consideration that two monogamous partners who are tested together regularly may engage in bareback sex, and getting tested is hardly suicidal. He also fails to take into consideration that heterosexuals also engage in such acts and they also are not necessarily seeking death. The biggest fact he forgets is that the bug chasers are seeking to become infected with a virus that will kill them. And for him to go so far as to equate any sex act with a desire to die is simply ridiculous. While some of what he says about the research that is out there is ridiculous, a lot of what he says is valid. One of the key points he makes is the relationship between wanting to die and bug chasing. One would think the two are the same, but they are not. As Forsyth and Gauthier stated, there are for main reasons why men seek the virus, death is not one of them. So while Forsyth and Gauthier are correct in saying that seeking the virus is suicide, Tomso is wrong in thinking that Forsyth and Gauthier assume the chaser wants to die; rather he wants to relieve his anxiety, experience an erotic thrill, make a political statement, or belong to a group from which he feel isolated. He also emphasizes the differences between barebacking and bug chasing and that they are not inherently bad, “It is hardly possible today to speak of barebacking without the implicit or explicit feeling that, in both the act and the very imagination of the act, a wrong is being committed.” (Tomso, 2004, 94)
Bug chasing is an extremely controversial issue that needs a great deal more research done about the psychology behind it. Too often as Tomso indicates, people assume the chasers are trying to die. And too often is barebacking seen as a “wrong” as Tomso once again puts it. (Tomso, 2004, 94) Aside from the interest of researchers and the general public who are aware of this phenomenon, action must be taken to educate chasers about the true nature of HIV. As Brondino et. al indicate
“Emotional well being among individuals living with HIV is significantly worse than the general population, and when combined with depression, emotional distress may contribute to the high rates of suicidal ideation in persons with HIV infection and to the high risk of suicide in persons with AIDS…depression has been found to be associated with more rapid HIV disease progression. (Brondino et. al, 2006, 713)
So while many believe that HIV/AIDS is treatable and manageable, and it is, many fail to look forward to the later stages and the realities of having AIDS. Too little is known about this issue and more needs to be done. Hopefully these bug chasers get a reality check and learn about the true nature of AIDS such as the numerous amounts of medications one must take. This issue was featured in an issue of Rolling Stone that Tomso addressed (and attacked) and showed several medications that AIDS patients take and all of the side effects each of them had. (Tomso, 2004) HAART regiments, which is also known as an AIDS cocktail, is a treatment used to fight HIV/AIDS. But as Baur and Crooks indicate, there are many issues that accompany HAART drugs.
“Treatment failure [is] defined as HAART drugs that no longer suppress viral loads…Once treatment with the HAART regimen stops or is seriously compromised because a patient is too sick with toxic side effects or too confuses by the complexity of dosing regimens, the virus sequestered in these lethal reservoirs typically comes roaring back, or it mutates, resulting in new strains of HIV that are less susceptible to HAART drugs.” (Baur and Crooks, 2008, 446)
Clearly bug chasers, while knowledgeable of the existence of treatments, know little about the side effects and the realities of the drugs. Discussion is key to getting this dangerous phenomenon taking place out in the open and understood.
No Comments Yet
No comments yet.
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
