Being an economist by profession, I have always been
fascinated by how men rationalize having sex with other men. Of course, the AIDS crisis has had considerable impact on how gay men rationalize sex, either protected or unprotected sex.
Two economists, Steven Dubner and Steven Levitt have sampled 150 men and women who had a relative who is HIV positive. While the sample size is small, not one of the gay men in the survey admitted that he had had sex with another 
man in the last five years. I guess these guys are either scared shitless or don't believe in protected sex. These gay men have assigned an enormous value to staying healthy. They don't want to engage in gay sex no matter what the tempation, because they have personally seen in a relative the implications of living with AIDS.
The authors believe that beginning in the 1990's, some gay men equated having unprotected gay sex with a very high economic value. That value was determined by cost of drugs, inability to work, healthcare costs etc. But this was before living with AIDS was manageable. Still there are many gay men and I include myself as one, that prescribe to the rule that unsafe sex is not an option. So I as a gay men, would equate and place a value on unsafe sex as beyond value, because if I was approached and offered money to perform unsafe sex, no money in the world would tempt me to do so.
These economists using 1992 as their base determined that it would take almost $2000 to persuade and convince a gay man at that time to have unprotected sex. I question this because it is an average. As we know, there are some gay men who are duped or fall into that "moment" where they engage in unprotected sex, so they do it for free. Gay prostitutes probably are divided into two camps, those HIV negative and those HIV positive. But with infecting someone with HIV unknowing leading in some cases to criminal prosecution, I would image that the cost of legal representation and lost wages as a result of imprisonment as well as the stigma of never holding a particular kind of job again, would make this value far more than $2000.
This is a somewhat unusual post for me. But I thought it could be informative. What it concludes that our sexual actions can sometimes be determined by value, either monetary or nonmonetary. A guy who can smooth talk convincingly and lays out for some drinks, can in the long run for the guy being seduced into unprotected sex, a very cheap pickup.
Your value to me as friends is immeasurable. You guys are worth far more than $2000. Though I sound like a damaged CD, I can never say too often, play safe.
Posts
4 comments:
Huh?!?!
Um, a missed placed value to base a study on here. These guys are talking about prostitution and defining relationship and sex dynamics in a way that I find suspect.
OK, let me explain... Here they are applying a monetary value to an event of unsafe sex.
Now you have to go find a select group of men that would perform any sex act for money in order to make this studies findings have meaning.
There are guys out there that would have personal values that make this study meaningless in relation to money for any type of sex.
So in my opinion the study is meaningless in terms of generalized use.
Now if I were to frame a more complex study that carried more weight.
1) What does a long-term gay relationship consist of? In other words, define your base group for study.
2) Does income affect the dynamics in roles in a relationship? Define the terms you will use in describing the relationships you see.
3) If income defines who is the lead partner in a long-term relationship. Does that person also determine safe or unsafe sex practices in the relationship? Would the less financially capable partner accept unsafe sex practices in the relationship if the other partner is HIV+?
Report your findings after studying as many couples that define a particular pattern in your criteria if possible.
'm with you Buff. I could never dream of having unprotected sex...ever.
Yeah, I didn't quite understand that study either. As for value, well yeah, it would depend hugely on the individual. Personally it would take a lot more than £2000 for me!
Those pics are good stuff...I love seeing two really masculine guys kissing deeply and sensuously. Great stuff.
And, in case you were wondering, me and my other half have never had unprotected anal sex, although we have, on rare occasion, drunk each other's cum.
I think I'm with Teddy on this--the whole thing soulds like what happens when somebody gets desperate for a PhD thesis topic. Sex is a primary drive, not an exercise in comparative economics.
My sense is that those guys who stayed away from sex all those years were scared of dying, pure and simple. I had just come out to myself and was getting my feet wet in the gay world in the late 70s. I was deeply concerned that at just the time I had worked through who I was, I could lose my life for acting on it. I don't think I sat down and started adding up all the figures.
You know, when you slip one of those shots of you in the middle of all the porn gods, you often wind up looking better than the lot of them! You look real.
Post a Comment