If an escort is honest but unsafe?

[manTOman]

Hi Everyone,

this is my first post. I've been reading the forum for several years and finally I've decided to chime in.

Recently I've contacted a well reviewed escort that I think I might have a wonderful time with. All the emails and phone calls were going great, when I suddenly inquired about safety? His reply was that he doesn't get tested since he's a top and he knows that he's clean and healthy, but that he always has condoms on hand if I wanted to use them.

Then I asked what would happen if I wanted to forgo condoms and BB, and he said that it was my choice.

I told him that I was uneasy with this and that I was really on a fence about keeping the appointment.

He said no problem, and that as long as I gave him a couple of hours notice, he'd be OK if I ended up cancelling.

Now here's my dilemma:

I really, really, REALLY dislike the fact that he occasionally barebacks , but I also tremendously appreciate that he is so brutally honest.

Regardless of his answer I would play safe, and under no circumstances would I allow to get fucked without a condom.

But:

Do I keep the appointment?

Do I keep the appointment and only do oral somewhat minimizing risks?

Do I cancel the appointment, which is what I always thought I'd do if someone told me they had history of unprotected sex?

 

I will not reveal the escort's identity, but he's well into his 30s, and it seems that he's fairly busy with his clients and regulars. So he's not a super young guy who doesn't know what he's doing.

Why in the world is he at least not getting tested? If he was positive, which I don't think he is, but if he was he could at least get treated and keep his viral load in check. Darn!

 

Anyways my fear is that if I cancel it might somehow influence him not to be so honest with his future clients, which would be a bad thing. I also understand that there might be no repercussions to me cancelling, and that he might continue telling the truth, which I appreciate tremendously.

 

So if you were in my shoes, what would you do?

 

Thanks,

manTOman

[rossthebosssf]

The sad fact is that in my experience, most escorts will bareback if asked (even if they say safe in their profiles). I could name at least a few dozen top reviewed guys who do (not that I would). I learned long ago to stop asking and just practice safe sex at all times. To date, I have never had an STD. Even if they say no to clients, they may be doing it in their private lives. Just stay safe and have fun. Don't ask questions that you don't want to to know the answer to as hiring is a fantasy and you don't want to ruin it for yourself.

[+ bigjoey]

Escort, pick-up or regular fuck buddy should make no difference: always play safe and assume the other person may have some type of STD.

[+ ArVaGuy]

Welcome to the forum. I hope you will enjoy posting here.

 

My advice is never go forward with a situation you are uncomfortable with under any circumstance. Your experience will very likely be a negative one with such second thoughts.

 

As to your cancellation influencing the escort not to be honest with future clients, it will not have any effect on his business practices or behavior. He very likely gets this question often and replies honestly. It's up to the client to make the next move. Some move on but just as many book a session with him.

 

The only sexual history you can know 100 percent is your own. Others...not so much. People in general are reluctant to reveal such be they an escort, a client, or a lover of many years.

 

IMO there is a hypocrisy about unprotected sex in they gay community and escorting as well. There are escorts who's profiles may state "safe only" but easily bareback. Same with clients...some will publicly espouse safe sex and easily bareback with a guy they hire. Therefore, I personally take such proclamations of "safe only" with a grain of salt.

 

This is is not meant to scare you off from hiring or participating here in the forum. As a client set your criteria for hiring and stick to them. Don't let the fear of how the escort will react influence your decision to hire or most especially in writing a review if you so choose.

 

There are plenty of high quality guys available who truly practice safe sex with clients. Keep shopping around till you find the escort you are comfortable with and enjoy the experience.

[+ Gar1eth]

He's an idiot for not getting tested. Even tops can get HIV. They can also get herpes- which isn't necessarily prevented by a condom, chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, and chlamydia.

 

Gman

[Steven_Draker]

Do I keep the appointment?

Do I keep the appointment and only do oral somewhat minimizing risks?

Do I cancel the appointment, which is what I always thought I'd do if someone told me they had history of unprotected sex?

 

I really, really, REALLY dislike the fact that he occasionally barebacks

 

I think you have answered your own questions, manTOman.

 

Tell your guy that you're not comfortable seeing someone who doesn't care about his own health and the health of his clients.

 

HIV testing is recommended at least once a year for all sexually active individuals and every three months for high-risk groups.

[Steven_Draker]

http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/3/1/1/7/4/5/3/Generalizations-78047514643.png#Generalizations

[Guest countryboywny]

Tell your guy that you're not comfortable seeing someone who doesn't care about his own health and the health of his clients.[/color]

 

Steven,

You hit the nail directly on the head. My feelings EXACTLY!

[McLeanspider]

He's an idiot for not getting tested.

 

Yes, he's an idiot for not getting tested and they clients who BB with him are even more idiotic.

 

 

He's an idiot for not getting tested. Even tops can get HIV. They can also get herpes- which isn't necessarily prevented by a condom, chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, and chlamydia.

 

Gman

 

The only safe thing is jerking off. You can get syphilis by just kissing some, we are always taking risks in life but with the exception of herpes and Hiv all other diseases could be healed.

After losing a few friends to HIV in the 80's when we didn't even know what was going on that guys kept falling sick around me, it really bothers this culture of "not giving a fuck" specially among young guys who don't mind been infected and taking expensive pills for the rest of their lives.

 

Escort, pick-up or regular fuck buddy should make no difference: always play safe and assume the other person may have some type of STD.

 

Bingo! Well said!

[mmk123]

Even though we all have had sex with people who are HIV + (and not to mention other sexually transmitted diseases) and did not know it, I agree with ArVaGuy. If you feel uncomfortable, do not go through with it. You will be wasting your money because in the back of your mind you will keep wondering if this guy has a disease or that you might be getting it.

[cany10011]

Welcome to the forum! Interesting post. Why did you ask him if you were to forgoe condoms then? Did you plan to bareback?

 

 

Hi Everyone,

this is my first post. I've been reading the forum for several years and finally I've decided to chime in.

Recently I've contacted a well reviewed escort that I think I might have a wonderful time with. All the emails and phone calls were going great, when I suddenly inquired about safety? His reply was that he doesn't get tested since he's a top and he knows that he's clean and healthy, but that he always has condoms on hand if I wanted to use them.

Then I asked what would happen if I wanted to forgo condoms and BB, and he said that it was my choice.

I told him that I was uneasy with this and that I was really on a fence about keeping the appointment.

He said no problem, and that as long as I gave him a couple of hours notice, he'd be OK if I ended up cancelling.

Now here's my dilemma:

I really, really, REALLY dislike the fact that he occasionally barebacks , but I also tremendously appreciate that he is so brutally honest.

Regardless of his answer I would play safe, and under no circumstances would I allow to get fucked without a condom.

But:

Do I keep the appointment?

Do I keep the appointment and only do oral somewhat minimizing risks?

Do I cancel the appointment, which is what I always thought I'd do if someone told me they had history of unprotected sex?

 

I will not reveal the escort's identity, but he's well into his 30s, and it seems that he's fairly busy with his clients and regulars. So he's not a super young guy who doesn't know what he's doing.

Why in the world is he at least not getting tested? If he was positive, which I don't think he is, but if he was he could at least get treated and keep his viral load in check. Darn!

 

Anyways my fear is that if I cancel it might somehow influence him not to be so honest with his future clients, which would be a bad thing. I also understand that there might be no repercussions to me cancelling, and that he might continue telling the truth, which I appreciate tremendously.

 

So if you were in my shoes, what would you do?

 

Thanks,

manTOman

[manTOman]

Welcome to the forum! Interesting post. Why did you ask him if you were to forgoe condoms then? Did you plan to bareback?

 

Hi Cany10011,

His answer was very non definitive and open. When he said if I wanted to use condoms we for sure would, my natural response was to ask what would happen if I didn't want to use them. Thank God he was so forthcoming and honest, because as noted from other responses that is not always the case - meaning we're all pretty much strangers and it's one's own responsibility to protect himself.

And just to make clear, I had or have no intention of BB, especially not with a total stranger.

 

I hope this answers your question.

[manTOman]

Thanks Gents!

All your responses are very insightful and give me a lot to think about.

I also don't mean to undermine anyone but I'm very happy that my very first post got a Draker response.

 

Thanks again to all!

[Guest Starbuck]

The only sexual history you can know 100 percent is your own.

 

The OP got some good feedback in this thread. ArVaGuy's post, in particular, strikes me as just the right blend of intelligence, practicality and healthy skepticism--and as a good guideline for anyone who hires.

 

I give the OP credit for asking questions, but I've often wondered how many of us haven't gotten answers about an escort's sexual practices, or health status, or how often he's tested because we haven't asked ... and if we haven't asked, is it because we can never really know if we're being told the truth anyway? It's a conundrum.

 

The first time I hired (but before the session happened), there was a post on this forum that seemed to suggest something bad about the guy I'd contacted. It was unclear what it was, but another poster spoke up to say that the escort in question was a stand-up guy. I PMed that second poster to privately confirm his good opinion of the man I was soon to meet. He had great things to say--and also told me that the innuendo was that the escort in question sometimes barebacked. Now, he didn't tell me that the fellow DIDN'T bareback--just that he was a stand-up guy. I wanted to think the best and I let that be enough. (The meeting took place; the escort was a great guy; barebacking did not occur, nor was it suggested.)

 

But did I then--or do I now--know whether that escort sometimes barebacks? Nope. And if I was really wanting all the information I could get, why didn't I PM the FIRST poster and ask what he was implying and how he knew?

 

Over time (and it's not all that much time that I've been hiring) I have come to believe what rossthebosssf says in his post--that a number of escorts will bareback if asked (or suggest it themselves), and that there are well-reviewed guys who falsely advertise "safe sex only." Basically, it's a "buyer beware" situation. But it's also a two-way street--can escorts expect nothing but honesty and candor from clients? Doubtful!

 

In the end, it's a matter of educating ourselves as best we can, choosing wisely, treating others with the consideration we hope is shown to us ... and then, well, taking a deep breath and deciding that a measure of risk is preferable to joining the monastery.

[Steven_Draker]

Yes, he's an idiot for not getting tested and they clients who BB with him are even more idiotic.

 

While I would abstain from calling someone an idiot, I'd like to stress on the fact if two consenting adults decide to have unprotected sex by putting all their cards on the table ... why not? It's their choice and their decision.

 

The escort in question has been honest enough with the OP. It's your turn now to take the decision that's right for you.

 

As to not willing to test for HIV: I can see two reasons: either the person is already HIV+ or else he's in denial and doesn't want to deal with the results of the test.

[marylander1940]

While I would abstain from calling someone an idiot, I'd like to stress on the fact if two consenting adults decide to have unprotected sex by putting all their cards on the table ... why not? It's their choice and their decision.

 

The escort in question has been honest enough with the OP. It's your turn now to take the decision that's right for you.

 

As to not willing to test for HIV: I can see two reasons: either the person is already HIV+ or else he's in denial and doesn't want to deal with the results of the test.[/color]

 

How do you know someone is negative? Escorts, clients, gay men in general lie about age and other things? Why not about status?

 

Unless the 2 guys get tested together and share their results right away a page with a test result could be easily changed.

 

We are all negative yet guys keep getting infected with HIV here in DC.

 

Let's just assume everybody is positive and use condoms, is not that difficult.

 

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6106/1820/1600/Sida%206.jpg

[marylander1940]

Your remark makes no sense. Where did I mention in my post knowing someone being negative??

 

My comment was about the escort in question who doesn't want to get tested. I think it's irresponsible. GET TESTED! KNOW YOUR STATUS!

 

Finally, I'm in complete agreement with your thought that you have to assume everybody is positive and you need to use proper protection.[/color]

 

 

I understood "putting all the cards on the table" as swearing to be negative.

 

Btw yes, we agree on a lot of things, and I know for sure you ONLY play safe and my friend from Baltimore wasn't able to convince you to BB.

 

Good for you and good for Belgium's healthcare because you won't get infected and pass the bill.

[Steven_Draker]

I think I see where the confusion is coming from. I should have said if two positive guys consented to have unprotected sex ... why not? It's their choice and their decision.

[Guy Fawkes]

Yes, it is their choice and their decision. However, what if they have two different strains of the virus? Potentially their life becomes much more complicated.

 

I think I see where the confusion is coming from. I should have said if two positive guys consented to have unprotected sex ... why not? It's their choice and their decision.

[marylander1940]

Yes, it is their choice and their decision. However, what if they have two different strains of the virus? Potentially their life becomes much more complicated.

 

Can we all please use condoms?

 

The virus can't live outside the human body, let's use condoms and kill it.

[tom1980]

My position is similar to the one I think Starbuck is taking on this issue. I don't really want to know what the escort is doing with others because if I knew he was barebacking, I probably couldn't go through with the appointment.

 

For me, there's a difference between suspecting an escort barebacks and knowing that he does. I only hire guys who list "safe only" in their ads. I don't ask if they mean it. Though I assume many of the guys I hire would bareback if a client asked them to because I've read articles and heard stories indicating that many escorts do, I can ignore those suspicions as long as I use condoms for anal sex when I'm with the escort. If I knew for sure the escort was barebacking, I'd have a lot more trouble being comfortable and enjoying myself even though I always use condoms.

 

I think that escorts who advertise as sometimes safe are more likely to get STDs (and get them more often) since they take fewer precautions, and they are also more likely to attract clients who want to bareback and therefore are more likely to have STDs. I'm sure some people dispute my logic and don't think that I'm less likely to get an STD from an escort that advertises as always safe than from one who advertises as sometimes safe. Even if that is true and excluding escorts who advertise as "sometimes safe" serves no practical purpose aside from rewarding liars (assuming the escorts I hire are lying, which I'm sure some are and some are not, as we've been told that Steven Draker apparently passed a friend of a friend's "test"), it still provides me psychological comfort and allows me to enjoy my time with the escort.

 

I've spent a lot of time thinking about the risks I'm willing to take and the ones I am not willing to take. I make sure to always take the precautions I've decided I will take when I am with an escort. I also get a full 8 panel STD test every 3-4 months. I suppose I could take the extra step and ask escorts if they bareback before I hire them, but for now I'm comfortable with the level of risk I am assuming based on the precautions I take and the screening process I use, which also varies depending on the type of encounter I am seeking (e.g., massage/hand job, oral, or anal).

[EastbayMike]

I think I see where the confusion is coming from. I should have said if two positive guys consented to have unprotected sex ... why not? It's their choice and their decision.[/color]

 

How about if two guys (positive, negative, don't know...) consent to have unsafe sex... why not? That's their choice too and their decision. What happen to free will? We're adults, we know the risks.

[Steven_Draker]

How about if two guys (positive, negative, don't know...) consent to have unsafe sex... why not? That's their choice too and their decision. What happen to free will?

 

Free will ... ok, as long as the person is not willingly transmitting the virus or omitting to reveal his positive status to his sexual partners, which can be legally used against him. Alas, those who have been around the block a few times are well aware that often people conveniently "forget" to disclose their status.

 

I think that escorts who advertise as sometimes safe are more likely to get STDs (and get them more often) since they take fewer precautions, and they are also more likely to attract clients who want to bareback and therefore are more likely to have STDs.

 

You're 100% right on the money and you make a good point.

 

I understand if you have to gather information that provides you with psychological comfort and allows you to enjoy your time with the escort, but ultimately you need to treat every sexual partner with the SAME vigilance and protect yourself with equal rigor. You cannot lower your guards only because someone advertises as "safe only" or someone has sent you a private message that he's a "stand-up" guy.

[EastbayMike]

Free will ... ok, as long as the person is not willingly transmitting the virus or omitting to reveal his positive status to his sexual partners, which can be legally used against him. Alas, those who have been around the block a few times are well aware that often people conveniently "forget" to disclose their status.

 

 

How willing are you to trust that someone would answer a question about their status truthfully? When guys I meet in sex clubs ask me if I'm positive or negative I chuckle when I answer "negative" but tell them they shouldn't believe me just as I would never fully trust a response I received from someone under those circumstances or in that environment. My point is every encounter has the potential for risk. We just need to understand those risks, gauge our comfort level, and act accordingly.

[Steven_Draker]

If you are HIV-positive, dating and sex always involve the sticky questions of if, when, and how to disclose your HIV-status. Should you do it before you have sex? During the first date? Only if asked? Only if it becomes "serious"?

For each individual, the answers to these questions evolve from a blend of ethical, personal and practical considerations. People living with HIV have strongly advocated every position from "when you first meet" to "never."

 

At the point when you decide to have sex, however, the disclosure question is no longer solely up to you and your conscience. At that point, your decisions may have legal ramifications. Failing to disclose your HIV status to your partner may make you vulnerable to criminal prosecution or to being sued by your sexual partner.

 

Criminal convictions for exposing another person to HIV through sex are rare. Since the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, more than 300 people have been criminally prosecuted for exposing another person to HIV. Only a fraction of these cases involve exposure through consensual sex. (The others involve activities such as biting, scratching and spitting, or violent sex crimes such as rape or forcible sodomy.)

Of the cases involving sex, most have been brought against female prostitutes (and not their male customers) or by military prosecutors against military personnel. Less than one-sixth of these cases have resulted in convictions, and more than half of the convictions have been against military personnel.

 

While most of these prosecutions have proceeded under general criminal laws such as attempted murder, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, attempted manslaughter and manslaughter, a number of states have passed specific statutes that make it a crime for a person to expose another to HIV through sexual activity.

 

 

California's "Willful Exposure" Law

 

The law makes it a felony punishable by up to eight years of imprisonment for an HIV-positive person to "willfully expose" another person to HIV through unprotected sex.

The law is narrowly drafted, however, so that it only applies to individuals who intend to infect others with HIV through sex. It is designed to prosecute cases like one in New York, where one man infected more than a dozen young women, not to police every sexual encounter engaged in by people living with HIV.

 

To be prosecuted under the law, you would have to do all of the following:

 

• Have anal or vaginal sex. You cannot be prosecuted for oral sex. As to anal and vaginal sex, the law applies equally to men and women; tops and bottoms. The law punishes exposing someone to HIV through these types of sex. Your sexual partner does not have to actually become infected.
   
  
• Know that you are HIV-positive. You cannot be prosecuted for sex that you had before you knew that you were HIV-positive.
   
  
• Fail to disclose your HIV status. If you disclose before insertion, you cannot be prosecuted.
   
  
• Fail to use a condom. Even if you do not disclose, you cannot be prosecuted unless you have "unprotected sex." The law defines "unprotected sex" as failing to use a condom. This means that every inserting penis has to be covered. Even if you are on the receiving end, you have a legal obligation to make sure that your partner wears a condom.
   
  
• Have the "specific intent" to infect the other person. Most likely, this element will prevent the statute from being used to harass people living with HIV. To be prosecuted, you have to engage in the sexual activity with the specific intention of infecting the other person with HIV. Just knowing that you had HIV when you had sex will not be enough. The law explicitly states that: "Evidence that the person had knowledge of his or her HIV-positive status, without additional evidence, shall not be sufficient to prove specific intent."
   
  

 

Because of this specific-intent requirement, the law is narrowed in scope to only cover individuals who want to infect other people, and who are probably expressing that desire. If you slip up one time, it's unlikely that you will be prosecuted. However, the best way to stay clear of this law, and other legal liabilities, is to always disclose your status and/or practice safer sex.

 

 

A Comparatively Lenient Law

 

While California's willful exposure law may seem like just another way to make scapegoats out of people living with HIV, it is extremely lenient in the context of similar legislation that has been passed in other states.

The AIDS Policy Center in Washington, D.C., reports that 27 other states have established criminal penalties for knowingly transmitting or exposing another person to HIV. Most of these statutes have been passed as the result of political grandstanding by social conservatives and the religious right.

 

Unlike the California statute, under most of these state statutes individuals can be prosecuted if they know they are infected and engage in sexual intercourse without disclosure. Some of the laws are even more broad and vague. In Alabama, you can be prosecuted for "conducting oneself in a manner likely to transmit the disease," and in South Carolina, for "exposing another person to HIV without first informing."

 

 

Other Legal Liabilities

 

How the law will impact prosecutions under California's general criminal laws, such as attempted murder, is not clear.

It is likely that prosecutors will move toward restricting suits unless the elements of the willful exposure statute can be met. Prosecutions under the general law have been rare in California, and have usually accompanied charges of violent sex crimes.

 

However, some of these general criminal laws do not require specific intent. For these crimes, a conviction can rest on proving recklessness or criminal negligence. Because the potential still remains for prosecution under these general criminal laws, you should not risk relying on the specific intent requirement of the willful exposure statute to avoid liability. The best policy to protect yourself from any criminal liability is to disclose to your sexual partners and to use a condom.

 

 

Civil Cases Brought to Trial

 

Following these precautions will also protect you from civil liability. In addition to criminal prosecutions, a number of civil cases have been brought in which individuals sue sexual partners with HIV disease for monetary damages. These cases proceed under the tort theories of negligence, battery, fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The most famous of these cases occurred in California. Mark Christian, the sexual partner of Rock Hudson, sued Hudson's estate and received a jury award of $5.5 million. Christian claimed that, despite his repeated inquiries, Hudson and his private secretary denied that Hudson had HIV. Christian won this award even though he did not become infected. Like most civil cases, he claimed as damages the emotional stress caused by being exposed to the virus, not actual infection.

 

Other civil cases have not faired as well. These cases are frequently dismissed because the plaintiff cannot allege the necessary facts. Criminal statutes are often used by civil courts to set the standard for what type of conduct is considered negligent. California civil courts may dismiss negligence claims unless the infected person's conduct meets the requirements of the new willful exposure statue.

 

To sum up, if you have safer sex and disclose your status to your sexual partners, you will not violate California's willful exposure law, and will protect yourself from any form of criminal or civil liability.

 

source: http://www.thebody.com/content/art32643.html