HIV+ Celebrities

[genericuser]

It took till last week, just before I left for the HIV conference for the shopkeeper of our only shop in the village to ask "are you HIV+ then?"

That shopkeeper must assume that everyone who wears a yellow Livestrong bracelet only has one testicle... every person who researches Sudden Infant Death Syndrome died as a child... every male researching breast cancer is post-op transgender. Sounds like the shopkeeper is a dunderhead of remarkable proportions.

* Note the above should be read sarcastically-- it was written with the intention of making the reader chuckle while making a point

[Scandbro]

Loving this thread, I want to add Greg Louganis may not be as main stream as Magic, BUT he is a modern day hero for us and many people are still discovering him and the adversity he has overcome. I would not want his role minimized. I think his story is important to be told and re-told.

Also, I completely agree we need a high profile celebrity to come out as POZ. There is a renewed effort here in the US to 're-think' HIV. Anyone who watched Logo TV must have seen the "Puppet Service Announcements". Its an interesting take on prevention, but it definitely begins to make room for more discussion in the broader community. I think part of what is happening though is that HIV is not a terminal illness since the CDC changed it Chronic but manageable. People want to participate in Breast cancer, and heart health. HIV is not trendy anymore (there is a shrinking pot of money to pay directors of ASO's and to fund research.) Also, in this day and age our collective consciousness is going to look at a celebrity, especially a gay celebrity and ask, "Why did you get HIV? Don't you know you should wear a condom? Why should we listen to you and fund your cause if your engaging in risky behavior? Breast cancer isn't a choice!"

Thats the kind of stereotyping I think we are facing, even within our own community. I think what could be helpful is an HIV neg, gay celebrity coming out as someone who decided to take PrEP, because that would be Angelina Jolie fierce and noble....at least from a public stand point. I really want to hammer home that public perception of a gay man who caught HIV recently is that he is making poor choices. Publicly, and doctors, typically only endorse 'condom only safe sex', there are no other choices...its very similar to the abstinence only until marriage philosophy regarding sex education.

The public conversation about HIV is shifting, prevention has been a big focal point and it will stay that way, but we need to talk more about PrEP. In Africa its standard. Hell we have vaccines. There may not be a vaccine for HIV at this point, BUT PrEP is as close as we have come. That really needs to enter the conversation about prevention, especially if we ever want to see the stereotyping die down. Anyway, I have gone on enough, I support the idea of celebs coming out as POZ or taking PrEP.

[Guest RAWGUYUK]

Ive often wondered if George Michael was poz because of all his highly publicised antics and recent illness. Maybe he isnt but i wonder: if he did come out as poz, would that be a good thing or bad thing for poz visability? I only say this because to some extent George became a public laughing stock and I'm not sure if he does turn out to be poz, it would be much of a help. :-/

[genericuser]

Ive often wondered if George Michael was poz because of all his highly publicised antics and recent illness. Maybe he isnt but i wonder: if he did come out as poz, would that be a good thing or bad thing for poz visability? I only say this because to some extent George became a public laughing stock and I'm not sure if he does turn out to be poz, it would be much of a help. :-/

I think that there are definitely connotations associated with a George Michael revelation that would add unneeded annoyances to his life if he is HIV+ and were to reveal it publicly. Wasn't there a backlash against Lougainis for a pre-revelation incident where he hit his head on the board and it was bloody which after his revelation caused people to accuse him of potentially exposing others?

When I started this thread, it wasn't intended to speculate and gossip-- it was the impression I got from NPH's gaunt appearance that made me realize that in 22 years no prominent celebrity, musician or athlete has revealed that they are HIV+. I fully support any HIV+ public figure's right to privacy and the burden that comes along with being called the "new face" of HIV by the media.

At the same time public figures publicly announce their diagnosis with cancer, battles against hardcore addiction, Alzheimer's, we are forced to see Joaquin Phoenix's awful cleft palette and hear about celebrities treating their diabetes (like the mother on "What's Happening" whose diabetes led to them cutting off her legs); every one of those medical issues can be treated and can potentially be life-long or life-ending (well except Joaquin's dumb cleft palette) just like HIV. However HIV is thought of as taboo by so many and, in many ways, becomes more taboo as it fades from the spotlight after being the media's disease du jour.

What makes it grow even more taboo in the minds of many is the lack of someone of generation Y or a millennial with the prominence of Magic Johnson coming forward publicly and further demystifying HIV to the public. When that person comes forward, hopefully instead of essentially being a spokesperson for big condom companies, they push hard for people to get tested because IMO if tons of people were driven to get tested in a given year then HIV rates in the USA would skyrocket and represent a more accurate account of the scope of HIV. The more accurate %'s would make HIV significantly less taboo in the minds of many and people would view it similarly to those other medical issues I mentioned earlier.

Sorry for the long post; I guess it's annoying when all that is reported widely in the media about HIV are sensationalized crap about the porn industry which only reinforces misguided perceptions by the public.

[bearbandit]

I was at the PositivelyUK conference this weekend, and we noted that the only UK celebrities to have come out as HIV+ did so when their careers were going down the pan, or they were about to die. Our feeling was that a poz celebrity who was willing to get involved would be wonderful. Elton John has given an awful lot of money to help us, for which I'm very grateful, but he ain't one of us...

Other thing I'd like to point out as someone with diabetes is that we are very open to infections and physical problems that make amputations necessary. Your remarks, dshanebb were really quite unnecessary, especially as metabolic diseases such as diabetes are becoming more and more part of life with HIV.

[genericuser]

I was at the PositivelyUK conference this weekend, and we noted that the only UK celebrities to have come out as HIV+ did so when their careers were going down the pan, or they were about to die. Our feeling was that a poz celebrity who was willing to get involved would be wonderful. Elton John has given an awful lot of money to help us, for which I'm very grateful, but he ain't one of us...

Other thing I'd like to point out as someone with diabetes is that we are very open to infections and physical problems that make amputations necessary. Your remarks, dshanebb were really quite unnecessary, especially as metabolic diseases such as diabetes are becoming more and more part of life with HIV.

My apologies, no offense was intended; simply my failed attempt to include a bit of sarcasm in an otherwise serious topic.

However, in your complaint you actually raised the point that I was trying to communicate: Yes, people with diabetes ARE very OPEN about their condition and it is NOT viewed as taboo or whatnot.

I included examples of medical conditions that are not only prevalent and serious but conditions that once had a stigma attached to them but today do not--- each of those conditions have multiple well known public figures/celebrity-advocates who themselves have the medical issue serving as a spokesperson/advocate.

Why not HIV? It's a comparable to the others I mentioned but lacks a true understanding by the public.

[Scandbro]

Wasn't there a backlash against Lougainis for a pre-revelation incident where he hit his head on the board and it was bloody which after his revelation caused people to accuse him of potentially exposing others?

I think you are correct, but that points to the adversity he faced, and over came reinforcing his status as a hero for the gay community.

[Scandbro]

When I started this thread, it wasn't intended to speculate and gossip-- it was the impression I got from NPH's gaunt appearance that made me realize that in 22 years no prominent celebrity, musician or athlete has revealed that they are HIV+. I fully support any HIV+ public figure's right to privacy and the burden that comes along with being called the "new face" of HIV by the media.

At the same time public figures publicly announce their diagnosis with cancer, battles against hardcore addiction, Alzheimer's, we are forced to see Joaquin Phoenix's awful cleft palette and hear about celebrities treating their diabetes (like the mother on "What's Happening" whose diabetes led to them cutting off her legs); every one of those medical issues can be treated and can potentially be life-long or life-ending (well except Joaquin's dumb cleft palette) just like HIV. However HIV is thought of as taboo by so many and, in many ways, becomes more taboo as it fades from the spotlight after being the media's disease du jour.

What makes it grow even more taboo in the minds of many is the lack of someone of generation Y or a millennial with the prominence of Magic Johnson coming forward publicly and further demystifying HIV to the public. When that person comes forward, hopefully instead of essentially being a spokesperson for big condom companies, they push hard for people to get tested because IMO if tons of people were driven to get tested in a given year then HIV rates in the USA would skyrocket and represent a more accurate account of the scope of HIV. The more accurate %'s would make HIV significantly less taboo in the minds of many and people would view it similarly to those other medical issues I mentioned earlier.

Sorry for the long post; I guess it's annoying when all that is reported widely in the media about HIV are sensationalized crap about the porn industry which only reinforces misguided perceptions by the public.

I am not certain that just any major celeb could come out as POZ and have it demystify HIV... The circumstances under which this celeb contracted HIV will be the first questions and if it turns out he got it in a bathhouse of by engaging in risky behavior it is not going to do us any good...UNLESS that celebrity has been around since the 80s or early 90s and contracted then. I think behavior and origin of contraction will be the important issues in terms of helping or hurting. I get that its a medical disease/condition, but its not the same as something like cancer, or even diabetes. HIV is a preventable infection....unless you want say being gay is a genetic predisposition. I'll say it again, I think the best thing that could be done is if a gay celeb came out and said they started PrEP and they get tested regularly. Another great story that I think the public would listen to would be a drug addicted gay celeb who caught HIV from their drug use.. BUT if that celeb doesn't stay sober there could be more stereoptyping and it could potentially be worse for us than it is now. Not that its really all that bad.

I guess I am a bit cynical, but I just don't think HIV can become demystified simply by having a young hip gay celeb disclose his status. I think potentially it could be more harmful. I think the circumstances around it all would have to be a perfect blend of 'old enough to know better but too young to care' persona mixed with a deadly earnestness to maintain innocence and vulnerability.

[genericuser]

I am not certain that just any major celeb could come out as POZ and have it demystify HIV...

I guess I am a bit cynical, but I just don't think HIV can become demystified simply by having a young hip gay celeb disclose his status. I think potentially it could be more harmful. I think the circumstances around it all would have to be a perfect blend of 'old enough to know better but too young to care' persona mixed with a deadly earnestness to maintain innocence and vulnerability.

Please don't cherry-pick one element of one of my comment and propose that is my thesis... Noting that you've been following this thread from the beginning, I would urge you to focus on the macro, not the micro and comprehend the compilation of my comments here,

[Scandbro]

I'm terribly sorry to have given the impression that I am astute enough to ascribe a scientific endeavor to the discussion. I have an opinion and I am allowing my thoughts to come forth freely. I don't see the problem with "cherry picking" a comment and responding to it separately from the rest of your comments. Sometimes it is distinctly important to know when to discuss details and when to contribute considering a larger issue. Often details are the important features of a discussion because it continues to make it relevant and relate able. And it is also useful in terms of recognizing different topics with in the subject matter.

Please don't cherry-pick one element of one of my comment and propose that is my thesis... Noting that you've been following this thread from the beginning, I would urge you to focus on the macro, not the micro and comprehend the compilation of my comments here,

[stevelondoncanada]

The only celeb I can think of was a German pop singer Nadia Benaissa - She was charged with grevious bodily harm for having unprotected sex with several men without revealing her HIV status. One guy actually did test positive, and two others pressed charges..

[bearbandit]

My apologies, no offense was intended; simply my failed attempt to include a bit of sarcasm in an otherwise serious topic.

However, in your complaint you actually raised the point that I was trying to communicate: Yes, people with diabetes ARE very OPEN about their condition and it is NOT viewed as taboo or whatnot.

I included examples of medical conditions that are not only prevalent and serious but conditions that once had a stigma attached to them but today do not--- each of those conditions have multiple well known public figures/celebrity-advocates who themselves have the medical issue serving as a spokesperson/advocate.

Why not HIV? It's a comparable to the others I mentioned but lacks a true understanding by the public.

And my apologies to you: The drugs that were available in the late nineties or so had a strong propensity for causing diabetes, and I freely admit I wish I hadn't taken the bastards and am somewhat oversensitive about the subject. When a diabetes doctor sayd "it's easy enough to cope with: just think of it as being like having HIV..." Sorry, man, I didn't mean to fly off the handle...

[genericuser]

And my apologies to you: The drugs that were available in the late nineties or so had a strong propensity for causing diabetes, and I freely admit I wish I hadn't taken the bastards and am somewhat oversensitive about the subject. When a diabetes doctor sayd "it's easy enough to cope with: just think of it as being like having HIV..." Sorry, man, I didn't mean to fly off the handle...

No apology necessary, but much appreciated.

I commend you for being aware of your health and making health management a priority in your life. So many people my age and younger are ignorant of or do not manage their health issues-- which is a decision they make in their own free will and while I don't judge them for it; I don't understand choosing ignorance.

Not to get too off topic but it's troublesome how decisions one makes by their own free will are completely ignored when HIV is involved; specifically I am referring to the increased prosecution of men accused of spreading HIV or potentially exposing someone to HIV. If two men hookup and they make the decision to bareback, universally known facts prove that there is the potential for exposure to HIV and/or other STDs.

It's not rocket science that if one tested negative a month ago but has barebacked in the weeks before or after being tested, their HIV status is "unknown".

• The earliest the HIV virus will be indicated in testing is 1-3 weeks after exposure however the only test that will indicate HIV in the body that soon is the Antigen test (RNA test) which is not widely offered because it is much expensive than anitbody tests.
  
• With the most commonly used HIV tests, the Antibody or "Rapid" tests it takes 2-8 weeks (up to 2 months) after infection, most people will have enough antibodies to test positive.
  

Unless someone is exposed from being raped against their will or via deceptive means (sabotaging the condom with intent to infect), there is no justification in criminally prosecuting someone via these HIV laws-- such prosecutions which are often sensationalized by the media only serves to demonize HIV and make it more taboo.

[bearbandit]

Well I still feel the need to apologise, so tough shit!

You have no idea of the relief it gives me to hear someone else refer to "HIV unknown" - you simply can't prove a negative! I wrote my first giftgiving bit of fiction yesterday (Pozdaddy) and all through it is the question "do you really want this?". I admit that as a pozman I was immensely turned on by writing the story, even though I've never tried before to eroticise HIV.

And I'm with you on rape/deception being the only reason for HIV's presence in a courtroom...

[Rawdad4sons]

I don't think you will be finding many celebrities willing to come out as being HIV + anytime in the near future. just as they are not so public about getting the clap, or gono, or syphilis. you know they all have bouts with std's but don't go public. HIV is not a virus that you get nicely, whether it is through unprotected sex, drug use, or blood-sports it is something that IMO will be in the closet for a long time.

Most public figures want to keep their sex lives private