Now that Kelley has gotten me to make yet one more expenditure for another piece of software to give everybody their !@#$%^&*()_+ plain text postings [total cost $140 and counting], I get to see that LBO-Talk is the only listserv that comes up with little hot chile pepper warnings for spicy conversation on Eudora. Let me make my contributions to those little hot devils.
1. What difference does it fucking make how Sullivan became HIV+? Lots of people don't know how they were infected; there is, after all, a period of years between infection and the appearance of symptoms. Yes, transmission is far more likely by anal rather than oral sex, and he may be mistaken [most likely] or in denial or lying [for some strange reason]. But bottom line: the means of transmission proves nothing, nada, naught, zip, zero. One can be equally monogamous or promiscuous using either variety of sex. The issue of transmission is irrelevant, and it is nobody's fucking business. The only conceivable reason I see for this particular topic of discussion is a need to feed prurient fantasies about other what other, more celebrity type folks do in bed [and on the floor, and in the shower...]
2. What obligation does Sullivan have to be "publicly honest" about his sexual life? Which LBO-Talk regular is going to regale us with a completely honest, no holds [only bottoms] bared account of their sex life, tastes and fantasies, with all of it checked by folks who are out to get their political ass [metaphorically speaking] by putting it in the worst possible light? Since it is now undeniable that he was clearly identifying himself as HIV+ in all of these settings, there is no case that he was putting others at risk in an unknowing way. End of story: the rest is nobody's fucking business. What two [or more] knowing, consenting adults do, and whatever risks they take [anybody want to discuss whether or not it is fair game to 'out' somebody for the 'risky' practice of fisting?] in doing it, is nobody else's fucking business.
3. Get off this fucking political hyperbole. You don't agree with what Sullivan has to say about gay politics so, ipso facto, his position is responsible for Matthew Shephard's murder. Sure, homophobic, gay bashing murderers always check with the newspaper columns of their favorite gay male conservatives [a bit of a stretch in describing Sullivan, who is more of a DLC type, like the rest of the New Republic crowd] for advice before they go out on the prowl. This is just one more version of the "you don't agree with me so you are beyond the pale" type of pseudo-argument that makes it impossible to have any real debate about such matters as gay and lesbian politics. It is the same type of argument that says if you have different politics than mine, than I am justified in going out and completely violating your personal privacy in my efforts to shut you up and discredit you.
4. It is amazing to me how facile people are with all sort of speculation about how easy it is for Sullivan to have a personal life and a sex life. You would think that it is a piece of cake for everyone, and that no one ever experiences any difficulty. First, he is forced to explain how he conducts his personal life; now it is so easy for others who know not a whit about him to proclaim his explanation is all nonsense. Give the man a fucking break.
5. The absence of any particulars in the condemnation of Sullivan's version of gay politics is interesting. What is his crime? Does he oppose anti-discrimination laws for gay men and lesbians? Quite the opposite. Does he take the wrong side on the current hot issues of gay marriage or the right of gay men and lesbians to be in the military? Quite the opposite. His big crime is that he thinks that monogamy is an individual and social good, for homosexual as well as heterosexual. I would not formulate the issues the way he does, and or take the positions he does, but I think that the notion that libertarianism is the only genuine gay liberation/emancipation politics, and that any one who does not revel in a commitment free celebration of sexuality is a betrayer of the cause, is pure horse shit. Those who want to have a pure liberationist sexual politics should argue for it directly, and stop trying to establish its hegemony by excommunicating those who do not.
Leo Casey
.