Escort HIV status

[seattlebottom]

I know that his has been discussed before, however the review of Santoro for December 13 really spooked me. The idea that an escort would specifically lie to a client about his HIV status when directly asked is to me tantamount to an assault.

 

I know that we all take risks when having sex with someone we barely know, but that risk, at least to me, was always a calculated one. Working under the assumption that the escort was not lying about his status and practicing safer sex, I assumed that most of the risk was mitigated, now I'm not so sure.

 

I'm sitting here, wishing that I had not read that review, it was very disturbing.

[alanalt]

And I see he's the Rentboy coverguy today too...

 

As for me, I'm far more relieved and grateful for the review than disturbed. It's a reminder that people lie and some people lie a lot. If you don't include that in your calculations when making your 'calculated risk', then you're just fooling yourself...

 

I guess I'm a bit of a fatalist in that regard. I work to reduce risk and take precautions but I realize that however hard you work to lower that risk it's always going to be there to 'some' degree. If getting a STD from an escort is a real concern to you, the only way to avoid it completely is not to have sex with an escort. Otherwise, you have to accept, for all your precautions, you could be the guy stepping out onto the golf course that's going to be hit by lightning today...

[Guest scortlovr]

I hire escorts quite frequently and I always do it with the assumption that there is a chance they may be HIV + (or carry some other STD). That is a risk we all accept to take when we have anonymous sex (escort or not is beside the point). I know this is harsh, BUT, how can anyone be so stupid or be in such denial to assume that a complete stranger will tell them the truth about their health, minutes before sex. I don't even bother to ask. To expect all escorts to reveal their HIV status is beyond naive - that's how they make their money!!!

 

As far as I'm concerned,it is my responsibility to myself to have safe sex, period. And if I ever do catch something, I'll only have myself to blame . . . On that note, I'm off to check the Rentboy site to see who's in town this week.

[JT Brooklyn]

IMHO..Those Guy's and there are many, who "Work It" Part Time, with another means of Income, will probably be more Upfront IF & WHEN they are asked about an HIV STATUS!

 

Most Guy's will not ask..Bottom Line.. "Playing Safe is THE ONLY WAY TO GO"! Unfortunately alot of Young Guy's equate that to the INFAMOUS "Just Say No" BUT ask anyone on whatever Regimen, IF it was worth it? You know the answer is HELL NO!

 

"Sex can be a Crapshoot" STD's etc... As can be Life! No Matter Gay-Straight-BI. :P

[Guest Merlin]

You have to assume everyone may be positive and use "safer" sex. But accidents happen and sex is never completely safe; condoms can break, cum can splash etc. Therefore it is better to try to have sex with guys you think are less likely to be positive. If you ask and they say no, don't take it as gospel truth, but honest ones will say yes and you can reduce your risk by politely declining. Guys who advertise as bottoms are more likely than those who claim to be exclusive tops. Straights, who only top, are safer still. Young are safer than older because they have had fewer encounters. No, none of these suggestions is fool proof, they simply reduce the risk involved in even "safer" sex.

[Juan Vancouver]

Not all that shines....

 

>You have to assume everyone may be positive and use "safer"

>sex. But accidents happen and sex is never completely safe;

>condoms can break, cum can splash etc. Therefore it is better

>to try to have sex with guys you think are less likely to be

>positive. If you ask and they say no, don't take it as gospel

>truth, but honest ones will say yes and you can reduce your

>risk by politely declining. Guys who advertise as bottoms are

>more likely than those who claim to be exclusive tops.

>Straights, who only top, are safer still. Young are safer than

>older because they have had fewer encounters. No, none of

>these suggestions is fool proof, they simply reduce the risk

>involved in even "safer" sex.

 

 

Dear Merlin,

 

I just came out from my bi-monthly STI'S check-up and after having read this thread I talked about it with my doctor. Now, he knows that I am an escort, and he knows exactly how many sex partners I have. After telling him what you wrote, he just look worried and got his charts from a drawer.

 

I don't know about the States, but in Canada, the group in which more new infections are happening is among very young males between 18 and 24.

 

Infections happen often when the active partner says: "Oh, I am not a faggot, you can trust me."

 

You are more likely to get infected from a healthy-looking person who is undergoing the process of sero-conversion, than from a sick-looking person that has been under treatment for years. (A person undergoing sero-conversion has amazingly high viral loads compared to an often undetectable viral load of most of the people under treatment.)

 

And of course, if you meet a bottom escort... it is highly unlikely that you will get HIV from him by fucking him with a condom. (It ain't gonna happen) You are in a much higher risk of contracting HIV from a top than from a bottom.

 

Which means that if you meet with a 20 year old, perfectly healthy looking boy, advertising only as a top, claiming that he only fucks his girlfriend... you should be as cautious as you would be with a 40 year old, haggard looking fist bottom.

 

He mentioned all the misconceptions that you wrote just as an example of how common sense and "intelligence" can do nothing for us when "reducing risk". We do not have to think about this, we just have to make the right choice.

 

On the bright side, he reassured me of something. If you keep practicing safer sex, change condoms often while ass fucking to prevent breakage, and check for other STI's often, you are more likely to be hit by a bus, than to contract HIV.

 

He didn't have a clue of what you were talking about cum "splashing", but he reassured me that nobody has ever gotten HIV that way. (Unless you meant cum splashing inside your rectum directly from a cock.)

 

HIV, he said, is a very mean bitch to contract. There are only a few specific ways in which you can get it. and if you avoid those, you are perfectly safe.

 

The other STI's, he reminded me, are much easier to get, but they are very easy to get rid off. And one should be constantly checking for them, because having an untreated STI might increase your risks of contracting HIV.

 

This gay-friendly epidemiologist's advise is simple: "You should treat everyone with respect, and with the fair assumption that they are indeed HIV-positive. You should treat yourself with respect, and engage only in safer sex practices."

 

At all times.

 

You should NEVER entrust your life, your health, to other people's honesty, looks, desires. It is YOUR responsability to stay healthy, if you so choose to, and only you will be able to have the control on that if you choose to AT ALL TIMES engage in safer sexual acts.

 

He ended repeating phrases that he hears often after a positive diagnosis:

 

"But he looked so healthy!"

 

"But he said he was negative!"

 

"But he is straight!"

 

"But it was his first time!"

 

"But I am so young!"

 

"But I only did it once!"

 

"But we love each other!"

 

"But we are monogamous!"

 

 

No matter how much someone claims to love you, nobody will ever love you more than yourself. Take care of your body and stay away from risk. It is YOUR call.

 

Don't guess. Don't use "common sense". Don't think you can assess who is healthy and who is not. Don't spread misinformation. Don't engage in unsafe practices.

 

And have the time of your life while being as sexually active as you want. You are going to be fine.

[Guest Merlin]

RE: Not all that shines....

 

I hope you told your doctor that I said always practice safer sex and assume the other guy may be positive. I respect his opinion but respectfully disagree. While, of course, more new infections occurr among the young, the reverse is true. More older infections among the older. And over all, young guys have had fewer encounters and fewer chances to make a mistake, and are therefore less likely to be infected. No, as I said, it is not fool proof. We a dealing with probabilities. And, it remains true that a bottom is at greater risk than a top, and therefore, more likely to be infected. My whole premise is that accidents happen and you should try to reduce the risk by attempting to limit yourself to those less likely to be infected. I clearly did not suggest that having done so you should throw caution to the winds and practice unsafe sex.

Again, with respect, you Doctor cannot know that no one has ever been infected by what I called splashing of cum. Suppose it gets into the eye? Ir the mouth? We ordinarily think of mutual JO being safe. But the possibility exists of transfering cum from one penis to the other. No one can prove that such infections do not occurr.

[Steven_Draker]

>I'm sitting here, wishing that I had not read that review, it was very disturbing.

 

I don't know Santoro, but what I found more disturbing is that the sole purpose of the review is to tell us that he's HIV positive. I would have been more comfortable if the information was coming directly from the source and not from the client in the form of a review.

 

I know a few high-profile escorts who are HIV+, but for nothing on this world I would tell anyone about their status, unless they want to come out publicly. This is only MY opinion and you don't have to agree.

 

Steven Draker ~

http://www.HotSexyStud.com

 

PS: BTW wonderful post from Mister Juan Vancouver

[seattlebottom]

>>I'm sitting here, wishing that I had not read that review,

>it was very disturbing.

>

>I don't know Santoro, but what I found more

>disturbing is that the sole purpose of the review is to tell

>us that he's HIV positive. I would have been more comfortable

>if the information was coming directly from the source and not

>from the client in the form of a review.

>

>I know a few high-profile escorts who are HIV+, but for

>nothing on this world I would tell anyone about their status,

>unless they want to come out publicly. This is only MY opinion

>and you don't have to agree.

>

>Steven Draker ~

>http://www.HotSexyStud.com

>

>PS: BTW wonderful post from Mister Juan Vancouver

 

The client wrote that his reason for writing the review was due to Santoro's lie;

 

"However, there is one thing that shocked me when I was leaving his hotel room. He suddenly told me that he is HIV positive. Before I paid him, he said he was negative."

 

This leads me to believe Santoro's character is that of someone who will say anything for money.

[stripfan]

RE: Not all that shines....

 

"You should NEVER entrust your life, your health, to other

>people's honesty, looks, desires. It is YOUR responsability to

>stay healthy, if you so choose to, and only you will be able

>to have the control on that if you choose to AT ALL TIMES

>engage in safer sexual acts.

>

>He ended repeating phrases that he hears often after a

>positive diagnosis:

>

>"But he looked so healthy!"

>

>"But he said he was negative!"

>

>"But he is straight!"

>

>"But it was his first time!"

>

>"But I am so young!"

>

>"But I only did it once!"

>

>"But we love each other!"

>

>"But we are monogamous!"

>

>

>No matter how much someone claims to love you, nobody will

>ever love you more than yourself. Take care of your body and

>stay away from risk. It is YOUR call.

>

>Don't guess. Don't use "common sense". Don't think you can

>assess who is healthy and who is not. Don't spread

>misinformation. Don't engage in unsafe practices."

 

Juan,

 

Your reply is right on target. You are truly a professional in the best sense of the word. You are definitely on my "wish list" for 2007.

 

stripfan

[Guest Merlin]

This is a life or death matter. The idea that the escorts right to privacy trumps the clients right to protect himself from a deadly disease is dead wrong.

[Louis]

And then of course there are the clients. How many clients lie about their HIV status? So you have an escort who is a student trying to pay off bills while going to university, and encounters a client with STD's, and has a disease for the rest of his life.

Every precaution has to be taken, because, lets say an escort gets tested three or four times a year, and finds out he has aids on his exam....meanwhile he may have not clue as to where he got Aids from and doesn't know if he had the virus for two weeks, one month or more than one month.

I have also heard on the radio that STD's are almost epidemic with teens and those in their early twenties. So what is that telling us... kids aren't taking precautions, and they weren't talking about gay kids on the program.

Louis

[+ ArVaGuy]

I concur with what Juan has stated here but also have to agree with Steven's point of view as well. For some reason, I am not prepared to take this "review" on total face value. It could be someone attempting to discredit the escort.

[Guy Fawkes]

When one has sex, one should always take in account the possibility that the partner is HIV positive and act accordingly. Anything less is taking unacceptable risks for both parties. Determining the actual status of a partner can only be done over a period of months with multiple tests.

 

It has always been my policy that HIV status is private information, and that disclosure must remain in the individuals hands at all times. In this case the comments were inadvertently published and have been withdrawn with my apologies.

 

The escort has definitively stated to me that it was untrue and that he has proof. I am willing to take his statement at face value.

 

Daddy

[seaboy4hire]

>And then of course there are the clients. How many clients

>lie about their HIV status? So you have an escort who is a

>student trying to pay off bills while going to university, and

>encounters a client with STD's, and has a disease for the rest

>of his life.

>Every precaution has to be taken, because, lets say an escort

>gets tested three or four times a year, and finds out he has

>aids on his exam....meanwhile he may have not clue as to where

>he got Aids from and doesn't know if he had the virus for two

>weeks, one month or more than one month.

>I have also heard on the radio that STD's are almost epidemic

>with teens and those in their early twenties. So what is that

>telling us... kids aren't taking precautions, and they weren't

>talking about gay kids on the program.

>Louis

>

It never fails to amaze me some of the questions I have recieved over the years on safe sex stuff from the kids and a few adults too. I am really worried on what exactly they are teaching the kids in their health class and what are the parents telling them. One question and no joke I was asked was can they get hiv from kissing? I just about hoped out of my seat and smacked the kid in the head! I hadn't heard someone thinking or asking a question like that since the 80's!!! Are people that lazy that they can not properly educate themselfs by asking their dr. or checking their health depts. website or the CDC's website? The world is getting scarier every second.

 

Hugs,

Greg

 

seaboy4hire@yahoo.com

http://seaboy4hire.tripod.com New page for reveiws http://www.daddysreviews.com/newest.php?who=greg_seattle

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/3307/dsc05257be3.jpg[/img][/url]

I get 90 mpg! You?

[+ deej]

>I am really worried on what exactly they are

>teaching the kids in their health class and what are the

>parents telling them.

 

It's not just in health class. When is the last time you saw a PSA about condom usage or safer sex? Society as a whole has gotten weak on the message because treatments have gotten better and people can live longer apparently unaffected.

 

Young people today did not live through the "first wave" the way some of us old farts did. It went from being "that gay disease" to being partially Haitian, to actually affecting everyone and then the public barrage about safer sex started. And then that barrage ended.

 

Young people today have no memories of the walking corpses in SF's Castro or NYC's Chelsea. They've never seen the tell-tale purple marks of Kaposi Sarcoma. <sp?>

 

Add to that the invincibility syndrome common to all youth and you've got a recipe for history repeating itself.

 

The message got weak, and kids that grow up with a weak message have only a vague awareness of that message.

 

I worry about the next generation. I fear it will be far more decimated than anything we saw before. And it makes me sad because we HAVE seen it before.

 

Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

[seaboy4hire]

>>I am really worried on what exactly they are

>>teaching the kids in their health class and what are the

>>parents telling them.

>

>It's not just in health class. When is the last time you saw a

>PSA about condom usage or safer sex? Society as a whole has

>gotten weak on the message because treatments have gotten

>better and people can live longer apparently unaffected.

>

>Young people today did not live through the "first wave" the

>way some of us old farts did. It went from being "that gay

>disease" to being partially Haitian, to actually affecting

>everyone and then the public barrage about safer sex started.

>And then that barrage ended.

>

>Young people today have no memories of the walking corpses in

>SF's Castro or NYC's Chelsea. They've never seen the tell-tale

>purple marks of Kaposi Sarcoma. <sp?>

>

>Add to that the invincibility syndrome common to all youth and

>you've got a recipe for history repeating itself.

>

>The message got weak, and kids that grow up with a weak

>message have only a vague awareness of that message.

>

>I worry about the next generation. I fear it will be far more

>decimated than anything we saw before. And it makes me sad

>because we HAVE seen it before.

>

>Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

 

Deej you have a valid point but with todays meds helping people live longer a few that I have met way into their 60's do you think that my generation or younger will see what happened in the 80's and early 90's? I am having doubts that we'll see such effects again with todays medicine, I feel that medicine will advance the treatments even more within the next 10-15 years. Dare I imagine a once a year shot as a form of treatment?

 

Hugs,

Greg

 

seaboy4hire@yahoo.com

http://seaboy4hire.tripod.com New page for reveiws http://www.daddysreviews.com/newest.php?who=greg_seattle

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/3307/dsc05257be3.jpg[/img][/url]

I get 90 mpg! You?

[+ deej]

>Deej you have a valid point but with todays meds helping

>people live longer a few that I have met way into their 60's

>do you think that my generation or younger will see what

>happened in the 80's and early 90's? I am having doubts that

>we'll see such effects again with todays medicine, I feel that

>medicine will advance the treatments even more within the next

>10-15 years. Dare I imagine a once a year shot as a form of

>treatment?

 

I share your optimism and hope, kiddo. Medical advances are announced seemingly weekly these days. I want to be in the same old fags home as you and we'll chase the cute male orderlies down the hall together!

 

But the cure rate to date is still zero. (And I know this is a personal issue with you and appreciate your willingness to talk it through!)

 

The sad truth about this disease is we've all seen people live with it for 30 years, and we've all seen people killed by it in just months. It's a damned unpredictable bug.

 

Infection rates among the young are through the roof. The only thing that truly stops the disease is stopping infection. But our society is not currently focused on stopping the infection.

 

Meds can do great things, but they can't stop infection (yet). When our society steps back up to the prevention message we somehow abandoned we might curb the infection rate.

 

Curbing the infection rate might lower the death toll while we wait for medical science to find an actual cure. But we're not doing anything about curbing the infection rate.

[seaboy4hire]

I sometimes wonder if a little shock therapy would be what the dr ordered for the kids (10-18). Show them what the advanced stages of having AIDS is like. On the rare occasion I see the quake I see a few in the waiting room. It really freaks me out to the point where I have almost left the office and went home to puke. I just remembered there have been a few times when I've seen Trojan commercials on Mtv but that was super late at night after midnight when most kids are already in bed.

 

 

seaboy4hire@yahoo.com

http://seaboy4hire.tripod.com New page for reveiws http://www.daddysreviews.com/newest.php?who=greg_seattle

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/3307/dsc05257be3.jpg[/img][/url]

I get 90 mpg! You?

[Guest]

Only a fool would assume all escorts are truthful about their HIV status. For that reason I don't ask (and don't much care since I take the same precautions anyways). That being said, I do believe that lying on that subject to someone one is going to have sex with is inexcusable and should be punished with incarceration for significant periods of time.

[+ deej]

It's been done before, babe.

 

When I was in school we had a "health" class about STD's where they showed some rather extreme slides of actual chancre sores from syphilis cases. THEY WERE GROSS!

 

It didn't stop any of us from fucking around.

 

The youth invincibility syndrome convinced all of us that it wouldn't happen to us.

 

A shock here or there won't make a difference. The message needs to be clear, and loud, and constant.

 

Smoking rates are down only because the American Cancer Society delivered a steady message, reliably and repeatedly, for thirty damn years.

 

When we can say the safer sex message is as strong and persistent, we'll see infection rates go down. We can't say that right now.

[seaboy4hire]

>Only a fool would assume all escorts are truthful about their

>HIV status. For that reason I don't ask (and don't much care

>since I take the same precautions anyways). That being said,

>I do believe that lying on that subject to someone one is

>going to have sex with is inexcusable and should be punished

>with incarceration for significant periods of time.

There have been cases a couple here in Washington that have been locked up for not disclosing their status. IMO a good thing.

 

Hugs,

Greg

 

seaboy4hire@yahoo.com

http://seaboy4hire.tripod.com New page for reveiws http://www.daddysreviews.com/newest.php?who=greg_seattle

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/3307/dsc05257be3.jpg[/img][/url]

I get 90 mpg! You?

[Guest Jesse Dane]

You're right, it is ridiculous Greg! I've had many similiar questions recently from guys. And scarily enough they span both ends of the spectrum from "Can I get it from kissing?" to "Well I can't get it from topping."

 

I make it a point now to snatch up any youngster I meet who has moved here to SF and do my best to educate them and drill into their heads the importance of safe sex. It gets so frustrating at times though as you can see their outlook of how it could never to them.

 

I also hold your optimistic outlook on the future for things though. I was discussing with a doctor friend of mine earlier this week about how the current prognosis with todays meds is 30 years. And with all the things looming on the verge of breakthrough right now that number will be going up very soon it looks like. So whatta you say, make plans to meet up and hang out in 40 years? ;-)

[seaboy4hire]

Your on kiddo!

 

Hugs,

Greg

seaboy4hire@yahoo.com

http://seaboy4hire.tripod.com New page for reveiws http://www.daddysreviews.com/newest.php?who=greg_seattle

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/3307/dsc05257be3.jpg[/img][/url]

I get 90 mpg! You?

[Steven_Draker]

>It has always been my policy that HIV status is private

>information, and that disclosure must remain in the

>individuals hands at all times. In this case the comments were

>inadvertently published and have been withdrawn with my

>apologies.

>

>The escort has definitively stated to me that it was untrue

>and that he has proof. I am willing to take his statement at

>face value.

>

>Daddy

 

Thank you for the clarification, Daddy.

 

SD ~