In September [2015], the Centers for Disease Control released a report which revealed that diagnoses of gonorrhea among men who have sex with men are rising in the United States. During the study period [2010-2013], the gonorrhea diagnosis rate among MSM was between 10.7 and 13.9 times higher than that of women or heterosexual men. Then, in early November, the CDC again released a report concerning gonorrhea, but this time – about the decreasing effectiveness of some main line antibiotics used to treat the disease; in other words, gonorrhea is becoming antibiotic resistant.
Tick, tick, tick! Time is running out; and, those with loved ones in the “gay” lifestyle should be very scared: more than half of all those young men who are now “coming out” as “gay” will be HIV+ by the time they reach age 50; syphilis is rampant in the male homosexual community, but, today, scientists at the CDC are raising concerns over the possibility of an antibiotic resistant strain of gonorrhea, which, is particularly prevalent among “gay” men.*
As long as I live, I will never forget someone that I met in 1993; in many ways he was the perfect male; when I first saw him, a fellow student, in one of my classes at Berkeley, I thought he was way too cute to be straight and too manly to be “gay.” I was confused, for he exuded a sort of easy masculinity that was antithetic to the type of forced oily leathered machoism that was my only respite in the “gay” world. I confided with a friend in the same class that I was entranced by this guy; and, she assured me that he was indeed “gay,” but that he had a boyfriend. Upon hearing the first bit of news, I was like: “Yes!” As to the second part, well – to myself I thought: every “gay” man – even those with boyfriends and husbands, have the right to negotiate.
A few days later, I built up enough nerve to sit next to him at our next class; afterwards, we talked and I found out that we shared a lot of common interests – especially in our academic pursuits. Although we were about the same age – he was rather new to San Francisco and to the “gay” scene, while I had been “out” for five years; another point of departure, while I dived head first into “gay” sex at age 18, he had decided to take things much slower; I was astonished when he told me that, up until then, he had only been with four men; feeling rather slutty – I was somewhat ashamed to admit that my number was closer to 100; and, although our family backgrounds were similar, my parents knew pretty much nothing about what I was doing, unlike his – though not thrilled with their son being “gay,” were still rather happy and relieved that he had settled down with someone.
That particular semester, we hung around each other a lot. As for my attraction to him – I made that very evident from almost the beginning. And, although I was free at the time, he was not and was very committed to keeping our friendship platonic and staying faithful to his boyfriend. I didn’t believe him, and over the next few months – I intermittingly tried. Sometimes it was in jest, but, inside of me – I thought perhaps he was the one. The “one” every “gay” guy dreams of: the perfect man who will make everything okay; make the pain of a lost childhood, the loneliness, and the constant insanity in the “gay” world seem like it was all worth it. I needed him. In a real sense, I was like a blood-starved vampire, needing to draw the male essence from this man in order for me to survive. Only, to my frustration, he didn’t falter. Being the wholly self-centered pig that I was, after a while, I gave up on the project and moved on to the next phantasm of the perfect male ideal. I missed him; I missed our endless conversations and our shared love for art and history, but, back then, that wasn’t enough for me. Over the next year, I saw him a couple of times across campus – waved, and then kept walking. Some months later, I heard that he wasn’t doing well – that he was HIV+. I couldn’t believe it, not him. For all his strict code of faithfulness and attention to cautious detail, apparently, his boyfriend had neither been as faithful nor as cautious. After that, I didn’t want to see him – What could I say?
Now, after all these years have passed – I think back and remember the incredible waste; the complete random mindlessness of it all; and, how little things have changed. Today, parents willingly, and sometimes not so willingly – but with little protest, offer up their sons to this meaningless lie. Some know little, or nothing, about what awaits their children. Others foolhardily believe that a “gay” sort of domestic bliss will protect everyone from disease and death. The Truth is: nothing will. Recently, it was revealed that: “Sixty-eight percent of HIV transmissions [in gay men] were from main sex partners;” i.e. the majority of men who contracted HIV did so from a steady boyfriend or from a husband.1 Twenty years ago, I should have died from AIDS, not my fastidious and precious friend; but, I didn’t. Surviving is part of my punishment; for his parents – I am sure it is as well.
In an ideal situation it would be far simpler for everyone involved, if – when we discover that a relative or friend is discerning going into the “gay” lifestyle, or is already in it, that everyone stays incredibly calm, unemotional, and objective; taking things very slowly, being brilliantly “pastoral” in our approach: “accompanying” those on their journey; not being reactionary or judgmental; allowing them to figure things out for themselves. In the best pastoral circumstances, this is accomplished, according to Cardinal Wuerl of Washington: “…to make sure that pastoral care takes account of the limitation of real, actual, concrete situations and of what each person is able to do, capable of doing. It has been the longstanding practice in the Church to present her teaching in its entirety while at the same time to accompany, pastorally and with mercy, those, all of us, who struggle to live out as best we can the fullness of the teaching.” He later added: “But the church’s pastoral life is the application of the teaching to where people are.” Only, what if – where “people are” is on the edge of a precipice? What then do you do? Archbishop Cupich of Chicago says: “If we’re really going to accompany people, we have to first of all engage them…” Only, how long is this “engage”-ment process going to take? For, some of us, those men in the “gay” life, there is very little [no] time to spare. With this in mind, I think Cardinal Collins of Toronto put it best when he said” “Pastors, who must daily accompany their people in their struggles, should imitate Jesus on the road to Emmaus and, with clarity and charity, preach the call to conversion, which is the foundation for the liberating message of Jesus: ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand’” (Matthew 4:17). That’s it! This world is passing away – and you do not have the luxury of pastoralism. Scream if you have to, that in “gay” - only death awaits you.
Repent! And live.
* “…within a cohort of young men now 20 years of age, the total burden of HIV disease would be estimated to be 25.4% by the time that they reach the age of 30, 41.4% at age 40 and 54.0% at age 50…Among African American MSM the model predicts that 7.8% of African American MSM will be HIV positive by age 20, 38.7% at age 30 and 59.3% by age 40.”*
“Running in Place: Implications of HIV Incidence Estimates among Urban Men Who Have Sex with Men in the United States and Other Industrialized Countries”
Ron Stall et al.
AIDS Behav. 2009 Aug; 13(4): 615–629.
“Men Who Have Sex With Men Have a 140-Fold Higher Risk for Newly Diagnosed HIV and Syphilis Compared With Heterosexual Men in New York City.”
Preeti Pathela, DrPH, MPH, et al.
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2011;58:408–416
1. “Estimating the proportion of HIV transmissions from main sex partners among men who have sex with men in five US cities.”
Patrick Sullivan, et al.
AIDS (London, England) (Impact Factor: 5.55). 07/2009; 23(9):1153-62.