Announcement to include Breedingzone in a research study on gay men and barebacking

[BBCockTaker]

I believe we should have this as an open discussion with everyone given ample opportunity to air their opinions, we do not think alike or have similar perspectives on all these issues - I believe this site accommodates a very broad spectrum of interests from cultures and freedoms too diverse to list.

If we were to democratise this, I'll suggest we have a poll on views from fully in support of research through ambivalence to dead against it.

Much as the decision is primarily in the hands of the moderator, a wider engagement in the decision making process of this community surely cannot go amiss - let us be persuaded rather than have our opinions to the contrary contemned and rubbished.

Thanks. :-)

[rawTOP]

I believe we should have this as an open discussion with everyone given ample opportunity to air their opinions, we do not think alike or have similar perspectives on all these issues - I believe this site accommodates a very broad spectrum of interests from cultures and freedoms too diverse to list.

If we were to democratise this, I'll suggest we have a poll on views from fully in support of research through ambivalence to dead against it.

Much as the decision is primarily in the hands of the moderator, a wider engagement in the decision making process of this community surely cannot go amiss - let us be persuaded rather than have our opinions to the contrary contemned and rubbished.

I own the site. I've approved it. If you have an issue with it, then don't participate.

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

My approach is to 'complicate' it in order to blur the lines of what are considered 'good' and 'bad' in sex (barebacking complicates a lot of things we take for granted about sex) and also to challenge a lot of research that's already been done on barebacking: namely, seeking explanations as to why gay and other homosexually active men do it.

Like others, I am interested in reading the results of your research. One cautionary note. Not everyone on this site is gay. Not everyone on this site is male. To the point about "taking things for granted"; I hope you'll put in an historical perspective. Prior to the AIDS Crisis; gay men didn't generally use condoms. Prior to the pill becoming available in the early sixties; straight couples used condoms to prevent pregnancy; afterwards they were free to go bare. True; those looking to avoid STI's did as well - but that was thought to be a risk amongst sex professionals. The condom culture really came online with AIDS. The fact that sex bare feels hugely different than sex rubbered up will I suspect show up as a factor. I look forward to hearing both how your research is progressing; and of course the conclusions you reach.

You mention research that has already been done vis-a-vis barebacking. Would you mind opening up a thread where at least the conclusions of such research could be posted (and of course, since you're seeing it; post them there)?

Finally to the concerns and fears; and as rawTOP has already pointed out; nothing we post here is confidential. Google your username here and you'll see all of your posts... If any of us here are fearful about identity, it may pay to mix it up by using different names on different sites; and names obscure enough to not track back to you...

[bbckresearch]

Thanks very much rawTOP for defending the research. I also wish to reiterate that if anyone wishes for any part of their posts not to be included in the research, you have the right to withdraw without any consequences and without giving any reason.

Due to the nature of online research, it is quite difficult to really fix a border between what is considered 'private' and 'public', especially when the internet is considered to be in a public domain. There are indeed a lot of online research that just casually take everything out of an online forum or sometimes just 'lurking', without the permission of its owner or without letting any of its members know and still gets published. This kind of research is justified by arguing that such websites are part of the public domain, as such, any part of it will be considered free for all. However, because I wish to conduct research as ethical as possible, and because I think the owner and the community deserves respect, I have chosen to go through the more difficult process of passing through the ethics and also through the gate keepers to ensure a more respectful research for everyone involved. I just want to remind everyone that, as laid out in the Participant Information Sheet and approved by the Faculty of Health Human Ethics Committee, every means to protect the privacy and confidentiality of the website, its owner(s) and members will be executed. However, this guarantee is not absolute as powerful search engines, such as Google, can easily trace the website.

If there are any more questions/concerns that I'm not able to answer, please refer to the contact information of my project supervisors, as well as the Ethics Committee as outlined in the Participant Information Sheet.

Like others, I am interested in reading the results of your research. One cautionary note. Not everyone on this site is gay. Not everyone on this site is male. To the point about "taking things for granted"; I hope you'll put in an historical perspective. Prior to the AIDS Crisis; gay men didn't generally use condoms. Prior to the pill becoming available in the early sixties; straight couples used condoms to prevent pregnancy; afterwards they were free to go bare. True; those looking to avoid STI's did as well - but that was thought to be a risk amongst sex professionals. The condom culture really came online with AIDS. The fact that sex bare feels hugely different than sex rubbered up will I suspect show up as a factor. I look forward to hearing both how your research is progressing; and of course the conclusions you reach.

Indeed, I'm just beginning to realise that not everyone on this site is gay or other homosexually active men (or men who have sex with men, as coined in North America). I think that this is one of the aspects that needs to be highlighted in the research and to take this into account.

Unfortunately, one of the frustrating things I found when I was writing my research proposal is that there has been no 'historical' account of 'barebacking' except for anecdotal evidence about who coined it (even this is disputed: apparently it was Scott O'Hara who used it first in 1997, but it's also documented that Stephen Gendin wrote about barebacking in the same year). Intentional seroconversion has also been documented in the 1990s by two psychologists (Walt Odets in 1994 and William Johnston in 1995) who argued that 'survivor guilt' was the main reason for why HIV-negative men wanted to intentionally become HIV-positive. This rationale is still 'accepted' by some researchers as motivation for 'bugchasing'. However, I'm arguing that these two practices exist in different contexts and driven by different technologies. I'm ambitiously aiming to somehow 'construct' a history of barebacking, even if it's very short.

You mention research that has already been done vis-a-vis barebacking. Would you mind opening up a thread where at least the conclusions of such research could be posted (and of course, since you're seeing it; post them there)?

Yes, I can definitely do this. If others are interested, I could post these on the 'HIV/AIDS & Sexual Health Issues'.

[PhoenixGeoff]

Unfortunately, one of the frustrating things I found when I was writing my research proposal is that there has been no 'historical' account of 'barebacking' except for anecdotal evidence about who coined it (even this is disputed: apparently it was Scott O'Hara who used it first in 1997, but it's also documented that Stephen Gendin wrote about barebacking in the same year). Intentional seroconversion has also been documented in the 1990s by two psychologists (Walt Odets in 1994 and William Johnston in 1995) who argued that 'survivor guilt' was the main reason for why HIV-negative men wanted to intentionally become HIV-positive. This rationale is still 'accepted' by some researchers as motivation for 'bugchasing'. However, I'm arguing that these two practices exist in different contexts and driven by different technologies. I'm ambitiously aiming to somehow 'construct' a history of barebacking, even if it's very short.

FWIW, the first website I discovered back in the day (which is no longer extant) very much discussed barebacking in the context of "bugchasing" and "gift giving". 1997 strikes me as being rather late for the first use of the term, though I'm having some trouble working out an exact chronology for when I would have been online (I can give some of the signposts that might get one a bit closer to the dates if there's any interest).

I definitely remember there being a #gaybareback channel on EFNet on IRC right from the first time I started using it after getting my first computer after joining the Army. I remember it particularly because I'd gone into the channel looking for cowboy and rancher types . That was definitely around in 1997, possibly earlier (I'd have to think through that chronology).

As for survivor guilt, I suppose it's possible that that's a motivator for some people. It's not really a factor in my own case; I came out of the closet rather later in the AIDS crisis, around 1990 or 91 or so, and enlisted in the Army early in '95, after which I was somewhat insulated from the effects of HIV (and of course that's also when effective HAART first started). In that four year window, I didn't have any friends die (although on a visit back to Toronto after enlisting, I did learn of the death of a couple of former co-workers), but I think that's more a function of my personality (I don't tend to form large networks of friends and acquaintances by nature) and my relative youth.

If I were doing this sort of research, I'd personally look in two directions. First, the effects of promiscuity, which leads fairly inevitably to "accidental" barebacking (with alcohol as a contributing factor), which leads to diminishing fear and guilt over barebacking and potential exposure and a general exhaustion and fatalism over worrying about HIV. That's more or less what happened with me. (Note that this suggests that attempting to carry on the promiscuous gay culture of the '70s and '80s but in a "safer sex" direction may have been at best an inadequate response)

The other direction I'd look in is the meth epidemic that started around that same time. For some reason, meth use and barebacking seem to go hand in hand, possibly because meth use seems to encourage more "extreme" forms of sex while high, and also because meth makes it difficult enough to get and maintain an erection, even without a condom. Many of the men I meet today who bareback routinely and/or are HIV+ have either past or ongoing meth use.

[PhoenixGeoff]

Yes, I can definitely do this. If others are interested, I could post these on the 'HIV/AIDS & Sexual Health Issues'.

I was thinking more along the lines of research that's already been done based on participation on this site, but anything you have to offer would also be of interest.

Please note that most of us don't have access to academic libraries, and that academic research is often pretty heavily paywalled for the general public. If there's any way of getting around that for users of this site, that would be greatly appreciated.

[bbckresearch]

Hmmm...thanks a lot for this! I guess the attribution to either Stephen Gendin or Scott O'Hara is when the term first appeared in print (Gendin in POZ Magazine and O'Hara in his Autopornography book). Thanks for shedding light on this! But it might be impossible to fully determine when, who and what the context was when the term began circulating. I suspect it's from one of the big (gay) cities in North America, but this is just a mere speculation. Or, it might also be possible that the term came from someone from the country. After all, the term apparently refers to riding the horse without a saddle. Or, maybe another good way to look at is when gay porn started using the term. It's also interesting that you mentioned that 'bugchasing' and 'giftgiving' existed already before 1997. None of the research thus far has also provided a history of these terms. Anyway, If you have any more ideas, please let me know!

As for survivor guilt, it was said in Deann Gauthier and Craig Forsyth's research in 1999 that one of the motivating factors for bug chasing is survivor guilt. However, in 2007, Bruce LeBlanc found no support for this. However, it doesn't mean that this is not a motivation for some.

To be honest, I'm moving away from the kind of research that tries to determine the factors for why people engage in bareback sex because we can find any reason and try and prove it to be true. Depression, anxiety, drug use, sexual addiction, pornography, etc etc have already been documented and it just keeps on pathologising gay and other homosexually active men. As David Halperin says in his book What Do Gay Men Want?, 'whatever the intention [of psycho-social research about gay men's motives for engaging in risky sex], the result is a portrayal of gay men as beset by a number of serious psychological conditions' (p. 12). And, as a gay man myself, I wish to move away from this and perhaps say that it's impossible to fully determine the causes and effects of sexual risk taking.

And, in terms of meth use, I think there's a couple of researchers in New York already doing this area of work

[bbckresearch]

I was thinking more along the lines of research that's already been done based on participation on this site, but anything you have to offer would also be of interest.

Please note that most of us don't have access to academic libraries, and that academic research is often pretty heavily paywalled for the general public. If there's any way of getting around that for users of this site, that would be greatly appreciated.

Most, if not all, research don't really mention the source of their data/participants. It's quite possible that there's been research published whose participants were recruited from breedingzone, but it's impossible to determine this because most, if not all, just say 'from a website' without naming it. There are only two research that mentioned the sources of their data: David Moskowitz and Michael Roloff (2007) from ultimatebareback.com, which no longer exists, and the other is Sharif Mowlabocus (2007) from barebackjack.com (I suppose prior to the update of the website).

If anyone is interested in looking at some of these research, just send me a message I've compiled a list (last year, which needs to be updated) that I've sent through an academic listserv when somebody asked for bugchasing/giftgiving reading materials: Dean, Tim. 2009. *Unlimited Intimacy: Reflections on the Subculture of Barebacking*. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

Gauthier, DeAnn K., and Craig J. Forsyth. 1999. "bareback sex, bug chasers, and the gift of death." *Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary

Journal*20:85-100.

Gonzalez, Octavio. 2010. "Tracking the Bugchaser: Giving *The Gift* of HIV/AIDS." *Cultural Critique* 75:82-113.

Graydon, Michael. 2007. "Don't bother to wrap it: Online Giftgiver and Bugchaser newsgroups, the social impact of gift exchanges and the 'carnivalesque'." *Culture, Health, and Sexuality* 9:277-292.

Grov, Chrstian. 2004. ""make me your death slave": men who have sex with men and use the internet to intentionally spread HIV." *Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal* 24:329-249.

Grov, Chrstian , and Jeffrey Parsons. 2006. "Bug Chasing and Gift Giving: The Potential for HIV Transmission among Barebackers on the Internet." *AIDS Education and Prevention* 18:490-503.

Halperin, David. 2007. *What Do Gay Men Want?: An Essay on Sex, Risk, and Subjectivity*. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

LeBlanc, Bruce. 2007. "An Exploratory Study of "Bug Chasers"." *Sociological Imagination* 43:13-20.

Moskowitz, David, and Michael Roloff. 2007a. "The existence of a bug chasing subculture." *Culture, Health, and Sexuality* 9:347-357.

-. 2007b. "The Ultimate High: Sexual Addiction and the Bug Chasing Phenomenon." *Sexual Addiction and Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment*14:21-40.

Reynolds, Ellie. 2007. "'Pass the Cream, Hold the Butter': Meanings of HIV Positive Semen for Bugchasers and Giftgivers." *Anthropology & Medicine*14:259-266.

Tewksbury, Richard. 2006. ""Click here for HIV": An Analysis of Internet-Based Bug Chasers and Bug Givers " *Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal* 27:379-395.

Tomso, Gregory. 2004. "Bug Chasing, Barebacking, and the Risks of Care." *Literature and Medicine* 23:88-111.

-. 2008. "Viral Sex and the Politics of Life." *South Atlantic Quarterly*107:265-285.

As promised, I'll provide a summary of some of these in a separate forum, which I'll post sometime soon

[PhoenixGeoff]

I'm trying to remember what I can about the website. Given its mid-90's provenance, it was a fairly simple affair. A few jpegs, some stories, some polemic. A kind of a dark, "underground" design. Very heavily focused on "bugchasing" and "gift-giving" (using both terms...the first I'd ever heard either). I can't remember if the specific term "bareback" was used, though I think it might have been. I think the biohazard sign might have been used as well, though I can't remember for sure. There was definitely a kind of aggressive embrace of the denigration HIV+ gay men faced; I think a lot of the motivation for the site came as a reaction against that.

Something is tugging at my memory telling me that the guy behind it might have been from Dallas, though I'm not sure. I do recall that he made an active decision to take the ste down. That would have been at least 10 years ago, probably longer.

Sorry I can't be more specific (and the Wayback Machine is no help either, though I doubted it would be). Perhaps I can tweak someone else's memory.

[PhoenixGeoff]

I notice most of your sources discuss barebacking in the context of deliberate transmission of HIV. Is that reflective of your research question or simply the state of the current research on barebacking (perhaps because of an assumption that a desire to become infected or infect others is inherent in barebacking)?

Actually, you gave a kind of overview of your research interests, but you haven't really given much detail about the specific question or questions you hope to explore. Or are we still at a very preliminary point in the research?

[bbckresearch]

I notice most of your sources discuss barebacking in the context of deliberate transmission of HIV. Is that reflective of your research question or simply the state of the current research on barebacking (perhaps because of an assumption that a desire to become infected or infect others is inherent in barebacking)?

Not at all, actually. I compiled that list for someone who asked specifically for literature on bugchasing and giftgiving. The scope of my research is not at all limited to this literature. I'm actually problematizing the demarcation made in most research that barebacking is distinct because, it is believed, that 'bugchasers' and 'giftgivers' are mainly motivated by transmitting the virus, while 'barebackers' try to avoid HIV infection. Rather, I'm considering these as different manifestations/enactments/realities of barebacking and that we can never really 'know' these differentiations because barebacking itself is complex, multiple and not simply a coherent practice. I'm putting into question these definitions and differentiations and ask what are they (researchers in general) trying to do when they define these concepts? What do these concepts do and for what purpose? In general, most research is driven by the need to know exactly what motivates people to bareback. However, while these may seem to be politically neutral, they are fundamentally problematizing 'gay' sexuality itself. So what I'm trying to pursue is to avoid a simple story of barebacking (that barebacking is caused by this and that); rather, as there are many practices of barebacking, there are also many causes and multiple effects. So that, trying to put an 'end' to it is a fraught endeavour because it really is continually shifting. As with any sexual practice, we can never fully know where it's going to go, because the possibilities are open.

Actually, you gave a kind of overview of your research interests, but you haven't really given much detail about the specific question or questions you hope to explore. Or are we still at a very preliminary point in the research?

I'm interested in bugchasing and giftgiving (as two of the many realities of barebacking) because I think it might be opening many possibilities about sexuality itself. That is, we have a virus (a nonhuman entity) that is at the centre of these practices. Most barebacking research rely on the definition 'intentional unprotected anal intercourse', where intentional pretty much means people are the only agents in these practices. So that, people (mostly gay and other homosexually active men) are responsible for whatever circumstances. However, we also have the virus, as well as condoms (it's non-use does not mean it's not present), PrEP, PEP, lubes, toothbrushes, spit and many other things. That is, things also play an important role in these practices and not only humans. We also have medicine, science, and the law who may be said to be ethically implicated in these practices. Therefore, we cannot simply say that gay men are the only ones responsible for barebacking because there are many other things that are also ethically implicated in the practice. In this way, barebacking will be reconfigured as a network of both human and nonhuman entities and not simply a human behaviour, which is how it is conceptualised in most research.

Having said that, my main research questions are: (I) how do barebacking and HIV come into being (the main premises are: that nothing exists prior to the practice itself; that barebacking is complex and multiple; and that HIV is itself complex and multiple) through the practices of gay and other homosexually active men (and also other non-homosexually active men) online? (II) how are biomedical technologies, epidemiological research, safe-sex discourses and the law implicated in the discussions of barebacking? In addition to these: (III) how are subjectivities produced in relation to things, as well as techno-scientific and other knowledge practices? (IV) how are meaning-making practices entangled with things and other techno-scientific and other disciplinary practices? In what ways do meaning-making practices enact barebacking and the virus? (again, the premise is that there are many stories of barebacking, as well as many stories of HIV) AND (V) how do men make sense of sexual ethics in relation to techno-scientific practices? (I take inspiration from both David Halperin and Tim Dean who considered barebacking as 'ethically exemplary'--that these are ways of opening up the self to the other [not only humans but also to nonhuman entities]. Also, that there are discussions about morality--that is, what are morally acceptable and unacceptable--in barebacking, especially in debates about stealthing).

I realise that these are extremely complex questions, but I guess complexity is really what I'm trying to get at. Because any research is driven by politics, whether scientists or social scientists acknowledge these or not, I believe that my politics in terms of barebacking is driven by the belief that we can never fully understand what drives our sexual impulses (whatever that may be) because, ultimately, sexuality itself is complex. And, sex itself is not only a human practice, but there are many things involved in it. Thus, if we attend to this complexity, we can never really fully know the effects of these practices. Because of this, we can also say that what are considered 'bad' and 'good' sex is fundamentally open: what is considered 'bad' now will be 'good' tomorrow, and vice versa. I hope these clarify your questions

[bbckresearch]

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to post the announcement again, in case new and old members haven't seen it yet (also because of research ethics protocols).

I'd like to remind everyone again that if you wish to withdraw from the research, you may do so by sending me a private message or an email. No reason is required and there are no adverse consequences to you as a result Thanks!

[cumslut23]

It would be great if you could post the results afterwards. But in the meantime I am happy to help!

[bbckresearch]

Thanks cumslut23, I would definitely do that when it's done.

I just wanted to post this announcement again as required by the ethics committee for new and existing members to become aware that the research is still on going.

Please note that if you don't wish to be part of the research, you can simply send me a message without providing any reason and without any adverse consequences.

For your reference, the information about the study is here: http://www.latrobe.edu.au/arcshs/surveys/bareback-study

Thanks!

[bbckresearch]

Hi everyone,

Thanks again to rawTOP for providing me access to do research on the forums in BZ.

I just wanted to let you know that I have now concluded my data collection phase and I'm now moving on to the analysis phase of the research. Given that the data collection is over, withdrawal from the research is now over. However, if you still wish to withdraw, please contact me within the next two weeks. After that, there's no more chance to do so. For more information about the project, please follow the link: http://www.latrobe.edu.au/arcshs/surveys/bareback-study

There is plenty of data and I'm still trying to clean it up before making sense of it. I'd like to post some questions here at some point about my 'findings' in order to shed light to some issues and to generate further discussions. Thanks again and if you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Cheers