Reader comments · Elton John to meet David Cameron over gay HIV rates · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Elton John to meet David Cameron over gay HIV rates

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. I’m really not comfortable about the prospect of Elton Publicity Whore John meeting Cameron as a gay representative… Hell, I’d rather Gaga did it. >.> I don’t like her, but at least she actually cares.

    1. I agree surely there are better qualified people working in the HIV field to advise.

    2. Nathan, I am VERY comfortable with Elton meeting Cameron on this issue, PROVIDED Elton makes it clear to Cameron that:

      1. funding to all HIV bodies that collude with profit-driven sex-industries must be completely withdrawn.

      2. that a massive public education programme must begin so that the public is disabused of the lie that being infected with HIV is no longer a serious condition.

      1. So you want to remove a massive source of income for HIV bodies, then you want to add another massive cost to them? Wow, you’re a freaking genius, aren’t you.

        1. And you, Nathan, do not appear to be able to think creatively enough to see that the two proposals are far from incompatible.

          1. They’re compatible, it would just be stupid to do them that way. There’s absolutely no reason why the Sex Industry shouldn’t contribute to HIV funding.

            Unless you’re of course proposing that there’s something wrong with the Sex Industry as a whole. Entirely possible, I suppose, but I generally assume that anyone stupid enough to think that is to stupid to operate a computer or even speak in full, coherent sentences so I figured you couldn’t possibly be proposing such a thing.

          2. Brendan, poor Nathan apparently thinks he can read other people’s minds. He has also demonstrated a lack of basic logic, never mind a very flippant and unkind tongue.

          3. Perhaps, Steve, rather than making a piss poor attempt at mocking me, you should consider highlighting where my logic was faulty? The only faulty logic I’ve seen so far is the proposal that HIV Bodies should cut a major source of funding, then create more requirements for funding…

          4. Nathan wrote: “The only faulty logic I’ve seen so far is the proposal that HIV Bodies should cut a major source of funding, then create more requirements for funding…”

            Nathan wrote the above despite the fact that it is NOT “HIV Bodies” that will cut a major source of funding, as he has clearly written.

            It is the government that will cut the funding, Nathan. The government will cut the funding TO the HIV bodies.

            Now start THINKING before you open that foul and insulting trap of yours, Nathan.

          5. @Steve

            OK, you have corrected a sentence construction error that Nathan made. When I look at his other comments it seems clear to me what he intended to say.

            Its hardly the most heinous crime in the world.

            His point is valid, organisations whose work is focussed on HIV are having income streams reduced at a time when costs will increase. Its hardly complex economics to see that is unsustainable.

            I would take the argument further and say that by cutting funding for this work there will be higher costs for the future taxpayer

          6. Wrong again, Stevie. Brendan said that it should be Elton telling Cameron that the money from sex industries should be withdrawn, not the other way round. Please try to maintain at least basic track of a conversation before you start swinging your handbag around, dearie. And if you wish not to be ‘insulted’ as you apparently have by my words, might I suggest you try being something worth showing manners to, rather than the knee-jerk reactor you’re being ATM?

          7. Sorry Nathan but I’ve been following the comments in this thread and yours have been incoherent – and I don’t buy Stu’s suggestion that your errors should be forgiven as mere slips.

  2. Oh no.

    Aside from his charity, does Elton ‘Famewhore’ John have any medical qualifications to speak about this subject.

    Owing to Elton John’s willingness to make money from the proceeds of homophobia (see Eminem and Rush Limbaugh) then I think he is utterly inappropriate to speak to Cameron on this subject.

    1. Staircase2 28 Mar 2011, 3:29pm

      since when did you have to have a medical qualification to talk about HIV/AIDS?

      His Fame means he is able to open doors which otherwise are probably firmly closed.

      1. When you are talking about infection rates, potential viability of funding to deal with that and success of alternatives which the government have suggested then clinical knowledge is advantageous

      2. Eminem ?

        i don’t know much of his work but i did see 8 Mile and his role in that film was explicitly gay friendly – in fact gay protective

  3. No mention of the effect bareback porn is having on the safe sex message

    1. Probably because bareback porn has no effect on the safe sex message.

      1. Yes you’re right

  4. If only we all would do as much as Elton and David do for our cause. Hats off..

  5. Jock S. Trap 28 Mar 2011, 1:07pm

    I think such a high profile figure is probably a good thing to challenge the government over it’s funding and tackling of HIV. He does say the meeting will be with people who work for his AIDS foundation as well so I hope that does include people who are having to live through this too.

    He’s not one to be silenced so in that respect he may be the right person.

  6. Of course he’s qualified to speak on this issue! He’s speaking in his role as someone heavily involved with a major HIV/AIDS charity. He’s obviously not there speaking in his role as a popular singer. People can do more than one thing in life!

    1. @Dromio

      I dont deny he has knowledge on the issue of HIV. I just think his knowledge wouldnt be sufficient to counter some of the arguments that government may present. I also suspect that he is less of a strategic leader of the foundation and more of a figurehead, I may be doing him a disservice but thats my perception from information I have from people in contact with the foundation.

  7. Elton wouldnt be my choice of ambassador to the government on LGBT issues and I think on issues such as HIV that whilst a high profile personality may be useful for media reasons that it would be useful if there could be someone with a clinical background of some sort either as the personality or part of the entourage. I know the Elton John foundation does some amazing work and all credit to him for that, equally he has ensured LGBT issues are focussed on in the media – but he still seems self indulgent and inconsistent in his arguments

    1. Jock S. Trap 28 Mar 2011, 2:22pm


      He is not going to this meeting alone, he is taking others from his AIDS foundation many of whom are HIV themselves.

      1. Is he?

        Downing Street have said it is a private meeting

        1. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:17am

          It is a ‘private’ meeting between Elton And others from his foundation.

          1. If that is the case thats great. My experience of talking to people who have had private meetings with ministers is that they have often been one on one – but if Elton has appropriate supporters with him …

  8. Managed to get out of bed 28 Mar 2011, 1:29pm

    Like him or loathe him, he’s speaking out. Gay men have lost the emotional register of seeing their friends dying. Sexual politics no longer exists and with its demise is the loss of courage to be politically incorrect about the part gay men play in keeping safe…

    THT where have you been in the last decade?

    1. THT have done some remarkable work in the last decade

      Like him or loathe him he will speak out … so I guess, that should be welcomed – I just think a more informed ambassador may be better … Not saying Elton isn’t aware of the issues, just perhaps not sufficiently to counter some of the arguments

    2. Jock S. Trap 28 Mar 2011, 2:24pm

      THT have had sever funding problems of their own but they have done a lot of excellent, some of which goes beyond their HIV capabilities.

      1. Jock S. Trap 28 Mar 2011, 2:24pm

        meant lots of excellent work…

        1. As usual Jock you talk out of your back side. THT receive almost £20 million annually in funding including from the HIV drugs cartel headed by Glaxo, and have sod all to show for it where HIV rates are concerned. Quel surprise. They certainly know how to spend their wad; I sense an office upgrade in central London around about…now. It is time the truth was told how HIV was allowed to run rampant in our community while the likes of THT looked the other way, citing political correctness as their excuse not to tell the truth to the thousands of young men who unwittingly acquired this terminal disease through ignorance, as David Furnish correctly alludes to. Let’s see Nick Partridge et al in the dock to answer for their gross negligence.

          1. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:25am

            Actually over the last 3 years THT have had to cut funding to certain groups and have had to lay off staff. THT do incredible work toward HIV prevention and worked outside the box to help me when I was living in an area and suffer appalling racism and homophobia. They ended up helping me force the Housing Assoication where I lived, with the backing of the police and my doctors, to move me to a better, safer property. They didn’t have to do this but they did, so I know first hand what they do and how they help others.

            Here’s some advise, if you hate my comments so much, it’s simple, don’t read them because in the end you just show yourself up.

          2. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:28am

            As for THT it is something I can never thank them enough for. I know I am not alone in this. Guess it’s easy for you to slag off a Charity when you go on misinformation to aid your smears. You clearly know nothing about THT to attack them in the typical nasty way you do. Bitter much, William?

          3. I dont know the details of THT funding sources, so I am not going to debate that with you, WIlliam.

            What I will say is that I am aware of two things – they have run some incredible education initiatives both in terms of public health initiatives and in terms of supporting the LGBT community in either awareness of HIV or supporting those who have/suspect they may have HIV. They are regarded (rightly) as world leaders in some of their actions. There have been staff lay offs and certain back office work has been curtailed – so its not the rosy picture you suggest (although I dont know the exact financial picture) – also if there are to be cuts from public funding streams this will further blunt their effectiveness.

          4. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 10:37am

            I think it’s ignorant to say that these groups have “sod all to show for it where HIV rates are concerned” because we only know the figure from what these groups do. I highly suspect that without these group the numbers would be extremely higher.

            The fact you make such a blatant attack proves you actually know nothing about THT, HIV sufferers or indeed the LGBT community. You make assumptions about what THT do clearly without the facts so based on you just being a particularly spiteful, nasty person. No change their.

            THT are a credit to society, not just the LGBT community but to all those who need and seek help, guidence and support. Without their help four years ago I doubt I’d be alive today, they stuck their necks out and did more than even I could have imagined.

  9. Though I commend his work through his AIDS foundation, I don’t much care for the man. Hardly a friend of true equality in our own country either and opposes marriage equality. I hope Cameron won’t be listenting to him when the consultation begins.

    The only way to lower the HIV rate is to provide adequate information and aggressively pursuing ongoing education on the subject, starting with schools, mandatory sex/HIV education. There is still a lot of ignorance out there among straights too. The pharmaceutical industries should be playing an integral part. The cocktail of drugs out there give the impression that HIV is a manageable, chronic disease, it isn’t. It still kills and it will always kill, no matter how long an infected person remains on maintenance drugs.

    1. I reckon start by banning bareback porn. We cant look after ourselves we should not be tring to teach kids how to stay safe

      1. Personally I think all porn is a bad way for people to become educated about sex – and bareback porn even more so. However is it possible to ban bareback porn? I would have thought most of it comes via the internet these days so it would not be possible to prevent it coming into a country without an international ban.

        1. In my circles its unacceptable. If your comfortable watching it fair enough just dont complain when HIV rates go up and blame everyone else

          1. Do you think war films make war? Do you think serial killer films make serial killers? Do you think happy films make the world happy? Bareback porn doesn’t make bareback sex. Porn censorship is not an answer to HIV.

          2. LOL you just been b.tchslapped by Spanner.

        2. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:31am

          Trouble is, do you just ban Gay bareback or all? Then what follows?

          People who bareback don’t need a porn to help them make that decision, they have already made it.

          If your worried that people copy what they see, then why not bad horror films? Thrillers? anything with any violence in it? Any decorating programs by Anna Ryder Richardson?

          1. You’re right bareback has done its damage banning it is pointless. Let the youngsters get aids and watch another generation die. Fcuk it.

          2. @James!

            No one has suggested that bareback porn has “done” damage other than you. There is no obvious causal link between screen and action – that is a choice. If you ban one form of “entertainment” do you then ban all where it is conceived that copying what is seen on screen could be damaging …. how far do you go? Violence is films, computer games, soaps, drug use in dramas, soaps etc, Political comments, etc etc

            Its both an argument that is impractical to introduce and also suggests that individuals are unable to make choices – they see something on screen and copy like an automaton. Not a realistic concept really. What is needed is quality focussed education on this significant public health scenario

          3. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 10:47am


            Since when did people stop thinking for themselves. We get enough of that attitude from religion, without doing it ourselves.

            Fact is people who bareback have made that decision to do it. They don’t need a magazine or porn to help them with make their minds up.

            Each individual is responsible for their own actions. Yes we need to do more to help get the message across but we need to do it in an informative way not a lectured way or people will stop listening. A new approach, actually many new approaches need to be set up but unfortunately we cannot stop people doing what they want sexually, it is down to those people to protect themselves and everyone else. We can hardly stand over then.

            There are some men who just refuse to wear a condom and nothing you do will change that. I share your worries, I really do but there are some you just won’t get through to.

          4. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 10:51am


            Actually, there is a consequence to banning Bareback porn in that you then run the risk of making it more desirable so instead of banning it to, in theory, reduce the risk, you may actually be harming the cause more. It’s the ‘don’t tell me what to do, or I’ll do it anyway’ syndrome.

    2. Jock S. Trap 28 Mar 2011, 2:26pm


      Toatlly agree with that.

      1. Absolutely @ Robert, Jock and 2 champers

        Need to definitely lobby hard. Need to make government (and the ignorant members of our communities – and those who choose to latch onto us for their own reasons) understand the reality of culture change and the time that is needed, resource implications and then equip people with all the information they need to make appropriate choices for them

    3. 2 champers sips to being a diva 28 Mar 2011, 6:14pm

      Well said Robert. Now we need to lobby hard … Critical mass to having awareness takes years. No one is surprised at the stats. The lobby groups have been aware of a problem for years, but are afraid to provoke a backlash from the Daily Mail. Many issues need to be tackled…

  10. Well then here’s an idea why don’t you vicious, backward bitches put ya hands in ya pockets and give as generously of your money to this cause you all feel so strongly about – Bet you all conduct yourself responsibly when it comes to sex don’t you? no – oh what a surprise you f#@s don’t deserve this kind of support – Get lives the lot of you!

    1. Jock S. Trap 28 Mar 2011, 2:30pm

      What a comment and he calls Us bitches!! What a joke.

      Who says we don’t put our hands in our pockets and give? I know I do as do many, many others.

      and ‘ you f#@s’? Seriously?

      Oh my.

      1. de Villiers 28 Mar 2011, 4:52pm

        > Oh my.

        Lions and tigers and bears.

    2. @JohnD

      I suspect there is more awareness of sexual health issues in the LGBT communities that there is in comparable groups from straight people.

      Part of the reason there has been an increase in HIV infection in the LGBT communities has been due to a lack of engagement in the message of safe sex. Reducing budgets inevitably means there will continue to be a lack of education and engagement (regardless of whether those in the LGBT community contribute or not) which is likely to lead to further increase in infection rates and more expense to the NHS – it is actually shortsighted to not invest in prevention education.
      That also isolates HIV infection in the LGBT community and does not consider comparable rates across all people and amongst straight people. The reality is that there has been an exponential increase in heterosexual people with HIV.
      HIV education across all groups is crucial – we are just delaying higher costs if we are ignorant to this.
      I suspect you ignore this

  11. Robert (Kettering) 28 Mar 2011, 2:30pm

    This is one of those “Elephant in the Room” issues that nobody in government will talk about because they’re too PC. That is, the sudden rise in HIV/AIDS rates in the UK is not about Gay men but more to do with immigration, particularly from Africa. With large numbers coming from sub Saharan Africa it is a fact, rarely talked about in public, that a significant number come to the UK with HIV/AIDS. Of course, the Christian nut jobs will have a field day pointing their nasty little fingers at the Gay community rather than the real culprits, immigrants and assylum seekers!

    1. I still reckon if barebacking, drugs and increase in saunas and sex clubs like playpit and the fort

      1. James! I understand what you’re saying but you’ve got areal issue with bareback porn. The majority of porn stars practice safer sex and regardless of what porn movies someone watches, it doesn’t mean they’ll necessarily practice what they’ve seen.
        It’s like arguing someone who watches lots of horror films will become a psychotic mass murdering, mask wearing freak. I play lots of computer games – but I don’t go out there thinking I can shoot fireballs from my fingertips FFS.

        The younger generation is losing the message. They do not pay attention to the shock tactics which are becoming outdated not do they respond to being chastisted by an aloof organisation such as THT.

        Immigrants do undoubtedly create an issue but then again, we don’t have figures to point fingers.

        Also, i’ve been to a few saunas and if anything we’re deeply encouraged to USE condoms and not take drugs.

        1. Do know that horror films do not involve real murders? Thats a silly argument bur dont take my word for it


          2. Ok, then translate it to documentaries about serial killers then..

            The point I’m trying to make is that the vast majority of us (unless we have some severe psychlogical condition) find it perfectly possible to distinguish between watching something and partaking in it.

            I have no doubt that your argument holds water with a few cases but there is a bigger picture and to combat the growth in HIV needs a multi-faceted approach not some finger pointing.

          3. @James! Whether or not horror films include real murders they do portray them, and your argument that displaying behaviour means the audience are likely to mimic doesnt really completely add up.
            I do agree that some types of sex that are more available do increase the risk. I also agree that there have been a significant number of HIV+ immigrants (both legal and not) arrive in the UK. Due to official secrets I cant disclose how I know that.
            All of those things, coupled with decreased engagement in safe sex education will have an impact on HIV rates

          4. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:36am

            It’s not a silly arguement, your arguement is that people copy what they see, not if what they see is real or not.

      2. Stu makes a valid point about immigrants to the UK, especially those from countries we know to have a high number of people infected by the AIDS and HIV viruses. Countries in Africa and those from the Caribbean community have certainly vastly increased the statistics for infected people in the UK. I think its probably too much for some people to ask that some guy’s 12 inch black cock be placed inside a condom before having intercourse with them, you live by the sword etc. Some transparency regarding these figures in relation to infected immigrants would be greatly appreciated I’m sure but we don’t want to offend any ‘minorities’ by asking for this type of disclosure.

      3. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:43am


        What about Straight barebacking, drugs, saunas and sex clubs? This is equality. It may not be the desired equality to some but nevertheless this is part of what those people years ago campaigned for, Equality for all. We can’t go round picking and choosing what bits we do or don’t want.

        Equality means the things we do agree with and the things we don’t.

        1. Its not straight v gay you know. Why should we pick up the worst of straight behaviour and claim it as our own? What next domestic violence divorce rape.

          I dont mind it you want to fcuk bareback just dont pretend you care if HIV rates increase

          1. @James!

            Oh stop being naive

            There already is LGBT domestic violence (but many in the LGBT world and wider society choose to ignore that), there are already people who have dissolved civil partnerships and there are certainly some male rapes that are perpetrated by gay men.

            I don’t like any of that – and all these issues need to be tackled.

            I dont think anyone engages in behaviour such as taking drugs, barebacking, rape, domestic violence as a means of exercising their equal rights. No one has a right to commit domestic violence, rape etc. I do think we shouldnt beat ourselves up as communities that such things exist in LGBT circles – all communities will have people in them who act unethically and inappropriately – that includes LGBT communities.

            I do think though, that your suggestion people copy what they see on screen in facile and naive and not a solutiion to the issue of HIV rate increases.

          2. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 11:10am


            I don’t bareback, yet I wouldn’t want anyone to go through HIV like I and many others have.

            There are plenty of people out their who still think male rape does not exist, something I found out when I explained to ‘friends’ how I got HIV. It’s not about Straight verses Gay it’s about being equal in all things. Things we like and things we don’t.

            Is it right that someone Straight is treated for HIV sympatheitcally but someone who happens to be Gay is treated with disgust?

            No, it’s not. Fact is we can only put the information out there, other than standing over people with condoms thats all we can do.

            Like I say in many ways I share your frustration but people will choose and their are some you will Never get through to.

    2. @Robert: Do you actually have any empirical data to back up your statement or are you just using the opportunity to have a racist anti-immigrant rant?
      There has been an increase in HIV amongst ethnic minority groups, however, there has been an increase across the board.

      1. Robert (Kettering|) 28 Mar 2011, 3:41pm

        Maybe you’d like to take a look at this article in the Guardian, hardly the BNP Weekly News, and make your own mind up . There is a lot of data out there about the huge increases in HIV/AIDS rates in the UK amongst the African communities but like you, most won’t talk about it and if anyone does, as I have done, the instant response is “Racist”! Get your head from out of the sand I suggest and open your eyes!

      2. @G.A.Y.
        I cant go into much detail as I would be breaching my signing of the official secrets act, but I have worked with immigration and experienced personally that a significant proportion of those deported are on HIV medication

      3. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:45am


        It’s hardly a racist comment but actually a very valid point. It’s all very well using percentages to scaremonger but at least make them accurate.

    3. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:40am

      Robert (Kettering)

      That is an excellent point. I think that the people making up these surveys need to address this matter and allow us to see how many are from immigrants over the years. Not to pinpoint them but to see if the number differs between the numbers here and those coing hear. To add these figures together may lead to misleading numbers and percentages.

  12. The real issue is within the gay community itself. With all our gay hookup sites and almost instant sex avaiable as well as the increase in bareback porn is there any doubt as tk why there is an increase in AIDS and HIV. The real question we should be asking ourselves is why such the need for all the sexual encounters. What void are we trying to meet or what are we avoiding? Not trying to be a prig and sex can be a lot of fun, but if we honestly address this then we have to address the issue of sexual addiction which few are talking about. We need to promote healthy relationships and how to have them and keep them not one night stands. This is one of the reasons we are stigmitized and fear fills peoples minds and hearts on what it means to be gay.

  13. And the other unacknowledged elephant in the room is that these days HIV is not a death sentence. People KNOW that a HIV diagnosis does not mean you will be dead within 5 years.

    If HIV is a chronic illness rather than a death sentence then clearly it becomes less scary and people become more negligent about safety.

    Meanwhile I suspect Elton John is lying about meeting David Cameron simply to show off.

    Elton John is a horrendously smug, self-involved individual.

    1. Just toxic chemicals trips to the clinic side effects. Why worry

      1. @James!

        I would hope most responsible gay men who are sexually active would make occasional MOT visits in any case

        1. Christ you say that like a trip to the clap clinic its the most natural thing.

          1. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 11:35am


            I think you should visit a ‘clap clinic’. Not for an STD I’m not trying ot insult you but to see the amount of straight men and women, white, asian, black would shock you.

            On a busy day at St. Mary’s hospital, when I used to pass it was extremely worrying, esp when a lot of these people stereotype STD with the Gay community, each side of the clinic is overflowing with people waiting to be checked and treated.

            Your right their is nothing natural about a trip to the ‘clap clinic’. Trouble is there are too many (men usually) who refuse to check, weither gay or straight, so just keep passing it on. Of course the difference being that an STD usually is easy to treat if only people could restrain themselves for a couple of weeks. HIV, of course is not.

    2. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 11:25am


      I think most still see it as a death sentence. Clearly that still doesn’t work, however you do make a good point. I have been shocked that people have actually asked me to have sex with them so they can get HIV. They think it’s an easy way out of work and easy benefit money. They then get grumpy when I angrily bite there pathetic little heads off for being so stupid.

      They don’t take into account that most health problems are magnified. They don’t take into account the horrendous side effects of the drugs that are still new and the long term effects are still unknown. The pills I’m on, the basic side effects aren’t easy to deal with but when the label says side effects included heart disease and diabetes amongst other ‘slight’ (sense the tone) ailments, it makes for a life of hell but because the drugs are doing what they are supposed to you don’t have an alternative. Well you do, die.

    3. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 11:27am

      I can’t for the life of me even contemplate what goes on in these peoples heads that they seem to think this illness is an easy ride. That in itself it horrendous and it can be upsetting to see people think so little of themselves to think it.

      1. Although HIV/AIDS is no longer the killer that it was, people do still die from it in the UK. Last year something like 530 people died of AIDS-related diseases, primarily because they were either (a) diagnosed too late to be effectively treated or (b) were unable to adhere to the medical regime (ie couldn’t take the tablets at the same time each day, every day). Like Jock says, whilst HIV/AIDS may no longer be a death sentence it is most certainly a life sentence and for some that is harder than for others.

  14. Anyone think that maybe just maybe the participants in bareback porn are actually clean??? You all go on about bareback porn as if it were infected guys shagging each other. And ‘James!’ who says bareback porn is unacceptable in his ‘circle’ how pious and sanctimonious of you. Pontificating oaf.

    1. I suspect that in a lot of bareback porn all are either HIV negative and tested regularly or all are positive and are comfortable with bareback.
      Thinking that by banning bareback porn will stop people having bareback sex is an unsustainable argument. People are attracted to the intimacy of bareback sex (many will choose not to outside of a commited relationship where both are tested regularly) and whether or not there is porn which portrays bareback sex it will happen.
      There are sex clubs which promote safe sex in a very assertive manner but bareback sex still happens on the premises.
      Banning bareback porn does not give us a panacea where bareback sex will then stop.

      1. Stu. Porn is about making money first not sexual health. I put a link to the newsnight programme about a guy who got HIV in a bb movie. So even if you don’t beleive it affecs behaviour. How about morally knowing there is a possibility that you just got off on someone transmittin HIV?

        1. @James! I know porn is an entertainment industry that is motivated by money. I know it is not focused on sexual health. I also accept that there have been cases where guys who have participated in bb porn have contracted HIV or other STIs. I do think that most bb porn is either between HIV negative guys or where all partcipants are +ve partly as a result of the case you mention and a couple of others in the USA. Producers do not wish to find themselves potentially being sued/prosecuted for conspiracy to commit biological GBH.
          Its not that I dont see that some people find bb sex more attractive having seen it in porn – I just neither see that the existance of porn makes people copy what is occurring on screen nor do I think the removal of bb porn is feasible or likely to reduce the amount of people of engage in bb sex.

    2. Spanner so HIV- = clean what’s HIV + ?? If you guys really think bbporn has no effect on sexual behaviour then for once I will not argue and agree to disagree with all of you. Especially you spanner you self hating luffa

      1. Still waiting for your response spanner how do you describe HIV+ people?

        1. Jock S. Trap 30 Mar 2011, 12:02pm

          Have a feeling you’ll be waiting a Very long time!!

  15. Aside from the soaring HIV infection rate, just look at the teenage pregnancy rate, arguably the highest in western Europe. We all know the answer to that don’t we? Its lack of sex education in schools, including HIV prevention and other STD’s. It should be mandatory whether parents like it or not because they’re as much to blame for ignoring the fact that teenagers are engaging in sex, both straight and gay. Scandinavia and the Netherlands have some of the lowest rates for both categories because their governments and societies believe in prevention and fund programmes to make sure it remains that way. Cutting funding is disastrous and Cameron is making a huge mistake. His meeting with John will be pointless.

  16. I’d love to know how many guys Sir Elton was barebacked by during the 80s AIDS boom, I couldn’t take that little balding dwarf seriously if he strutted up to the door of No.10 demanding an audience. And Jock S. Trap he may be a high profile individual but so what, I think I’d take a non celebrity far more seriously than someone so keen to stay in the public eye. Is he trying to take over a role now that Liz Taylor is gone? And HIV and AIDS affects us all not just the gay community. As for those of you with a chip on your shoulder about bareback porn- just don’t watch it then, but I bet you all still do.

    1. 10 years down the line how you gonna feel when you know you got off watching a guy get infected?

      1. What guy get infected? Who the hell are you on about? The guys in bareback porn? Have you considered the idea these guys may get tested regularly? Go take your f’king crusade somewhere else James! Can you not get it in to your thick skull that people can watch bareback porn and get f’ked bareback with the knowledge that they and their partner have tested NEGATIVE.

        1. Yes that were both negative thing seems to be working you idiot. I swear aids took the best people and we are now unbalanced left with the bitter people who couldn’t get laid making the descisions. This is why we have gone from being admired to being a punchline.

          1. Durrrrrrrr………

          2. References for these Stu

            Fact – Most reputable porn producers (whether bb or safe porn) require a certificate of sexual health prior to an actor participating – or identify that all participants are aware of the risks and happy to proceed

            Fact – Most peoples decisions to carry out actions are not formed on the basis on one piece of material eg something they saw on TV/in a movie etc

        2. You are wrong, sad and a thick piece of sh*t

          “AIM likes to state that testing is enough. That’s completely false,” he said, noting that in the months before he tested positive for HIV, he had also contracted chlamydia, gonorrhea and herpes.

          “It’s very dangerous,” he said of adult film work. “It should be required that you wear a condom on the set.”

          1. Well of course some idiot porn actor is going to have an axe to grind AFTER becoming infected. If he was that worried about his health he should have taken a job in Home Depot instead of using his tool to make money. And anyone who catches chlamydia, gonorrhea and herpes and still comes back for more deserves all they get.

          2. Nice

          3. There is a suggestion that the actor involved there may not have even contracted it on set. He wasn’t making bareback porn in the sense most of us understand it, he gave unprotected oral sex and says that’s how it happened. But then it was revealed that his life outside the film arena was a little more ‘colourful’ and film wasn’t the only place he sold sex. His lifestyle was risky but he was probably safest when on set!

          4. Chucksetre

            Trying to rationalise it when you know its wrong. I seriously think that some aspects of gay” culture” are abhorrent and some you commentators are making me ashamed to participate on this forum


          5. Chuckster there is zero point in trying to rationalise your argument with James!. He’ll just twist his evidence to suit his argument. ”Let him have his tartar sauce”. He seems to be frighteningly negative towards large swathes of gay culture and our lifestyles. He is le grand closet.

          6. Tigra and you bareback away with your hate filled amoral attitude.

          7. @James!

            Fact – bareback sex increases the risk of HIV and other sexual infections

            Fact – bareback sex in the porn industry is as much as risk as it is if not carried out on camera

            Fact – porn actors have sex off camera as well as on camera

            Fact – people have a choice whether to copy what the watch

            Fact – a significant proportions of bb porn is internet based so difficult to regulate

            Fact – Most reputable porn producers (whether bb or safe porn) require a certificate of sexual health prior to an actor participating – or identify that all participants are aware of the risks and happy to proceed

            Fact – Most peoples decisions to carry out actions are not formed on the basis on one piece of material eg something they saw on TV/in a movie etc

            Fact – HIV awareness eduction has not been effective

            None of these facts make it a good thing that the actor contracted STIs – nor do they prove or disprove that he caught them during the porn shoot. They are however facts.

          8. Stu prove those facts I want references.

            Here’s my proof

            “Some health officials believe this is a sign of a wider complacency in society about the risks of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases which is mirrored in rising statistics for new infections”


          9. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 11:38am

            Must throw in….

            This is in no way making excuses but I have add another fact…

            Fact…. Condoms are Not always 100% effective.

            You still take a risk hence the term safer sex.

            Yes it is better and safer but not necessarily going to protect you.

          10. True dat

          11. @ James!


            Fact – bareback sex increases the risk of HIV and other sexual infections


            Fact – bareback sex in the porn industry is as much as risk as it is if not carried out on camera

            The risk is from the sexual contact regardless of where it occurs

            Fact – porn actors have sex off camera as well as on camera

            Don’t really think that needs evidence, does it?

            Fact – people have a choice whether to copy what the watch


            Fact – a significant proportions of bb porn is internet based so difficult to regulate


            Fact – Most reputable porn producers (whether bb or safe porn) require a certificate of sexual health prior to an actor participating – or identify that all participants are aware of the risks and …

          12. happy to proceed

            Couldnt find the reference I had read in the Guardian – but here is one from the BB industry – wouldnt usually be my source for opinion or evidence


            Fact – HIV awareness eduction has not been effective


    2. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:52am

      Tigra 07

      Elton John doesn’t need to take over from Liz Taylor because his AIDS Foundation speaks for itself and does help a lot of people, Gay, Straight etc. I think he might be good for this role because he is least likely to be silenced. I believe if he doesn’t like whta he hears he’ll make it common knowledge and fight towards making it right. He has his high profile status on his side for that.

      That is why I feel he might be good for this.

    3. Can’t argue with any of Stu’s facts.

      1. Stu you have Spanners agreement. You can’t get a more damming indictment than that Ha!

        1. @James!

          We all have people agree with us who we vehemently disagree with on other issues

  17. What’s David Cameron supposed to do? Tell gay people to wear condoms? Shock, horror, no-one has told us that before. Short of providing a Personal Condom Application Assistant for every gay man in the UK, what can actually be done that hasn’t been tried before? Nothing specifically for gay men at least – though better sex education for students on the whole could be improved.

    Still, this has little to do with education and everything to do with gay men being totally irresponsible. It’s the one choice they have to make themselves and what do they do? Bring grief to all of us!

    Guys, put a rubber on it!

    1. @hmmmmmmm (not sure how many m’s)

      Its true a safe sex campaign has been operated many times before but few have been as dramatic as the iceburg campaigns of the 80s. There have been other styles of campaigns such as “get it on” but few actually target the why of safe sex …

      There is a correlation between reduction in HIV infection rates and good quality safe sex education – there is plenty of international empirical evidence that demonstrates that quality sexual health education initiatives have a positive effect on infection rates.

      Reducing expenditure on HIV services and sexual health education services can only be detrimental to infection rates and thus on the expenditure that the NHS has to make on treatment. Yes, gay (and bisexual and straight men and women) have to be responsible in their sexual behaviour and have a responsibility. Equally, in the face of the evidence that sexual health education reduces infection rates – reducing this expenditure doesnt result in savings

      1. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:57am

        Of course, safer sex campaigns have to be an important part of education.

    2. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 7:57am

      I think it is important that David Cameron sees the importance of these HIV groups and the work they do.

      With some who ‘slag off’ such groups I think it’s unfair because what we are only seeing is the numbers after these groups are doing their work. If these groups weren’t around I have strong feeling the HIV numbers would be Very, Very much higher. That is why think funding for these groups needs to be cruical.

  18. What I thought I read in the PN article was that EJ is meeting Cameron with some of his people to talk about HIV – incidence, funding etc.

    This is a classic case of leveraging celebrity to raise the profile of a cause. Sir E opens the door and helps provide a bit of pressure while the professional make the case.

    Thank you Sir E for taking the trouble of doing this on our behalf. Given current funding cuts we need all the help we can get. And sorry about all these ungrateful numbskulls on here. They mean no harm.

    1. I agree Philip – and whilst Elton wouldnt be my choice (and I am not certain he definitely will have others with him) the fact he can leverage some argument with the PM is a positive thing particularly in the current fiscal situation

  19. Nuff disrespect amongst me breddrin. ku pon dis, not all tru about de jamaican community be wit de aids, dey be as much whiteys wit de disease as us. Show sum respect to all dey bwoys dat be sic de blaks and whites.

  20. Hopefully the meeting will finally result in THT and GMFA’s heads on the chopping block.

    1. Well William I can certainly see you have an axe to grind – not sure you have any evidence that substantiates your concerns

      1. Are you for real, Stu? The reputations of THT and GMFA precede them. Articles on this self same web site in recent years are enough to string their overseers up by the balls. They have given the coalition every excuse they need to take the axed to HIV funding, and their balls too if possible…

        1. @William

          There is a huge difference between reputation and fact

          THT have been stoically defended by Jock and myself on here and I have at least 10 friends who have been helped through their services.
          I’m not going to say they couldnt have done some things better – there is always room for improvement but I believe THT are a fantastic organisation doing a great job in difficult circumstances – and who are open to fair criticism.

          As for GMFA – I dont have the knowledge to comment on them as an organisation. I have heard some good things but I dont know enough.

          I am for real in saying I dont think there is any evidence for your contention.

    2. To be replaced with what exactly?

      1. Jock S. Trap 30 Mar 2011, 12:04pm

        Nothing I expect from the likes of him. Very bitter man.

  21. James! 3 mins ago Report Reply
    Tigra and you bareback away with your hate filled amoral attitude.

    Sorry, may not have been clear. I too think bareback porn is damaging, though more for the actors than the viewers, and I don’t do it in my life. I merely agree with others here that it is facile to suggest that banning barebacking on camera is some sort of panacea, especially when those appearing on camera are probably safer (notwithstanding your 2 examples, 1 of which is suspect) than someone picking up a one night stand in a nightclub.

    1. @Chuckster


      The crucial thing is education so people understand the risks they take and make appropriate choices …

      We don’t ban adverts for fast food but it isnt good for you, We dont ban showing people smoking on TV or in films but it isnt good to for you, we dont ban showing of violence on TV but its wrong … because people can make choices … and banning doesnt work – people will still eat fast food if they see it, people will still smoke and some will be violent … even if it was feasible to ban bb porn (which I suspect it isnt) then some would still engage in bb sex … and the arguments about infections in films is spurious to the argument to reduce bb activity – yes its sad in the case of the actors who were infected (however caused) but it doesnt evidence that a ban would achieve anything

    2. forget the ban. And thanks for agreeing that bb porn is damaging. I don’t understand how the rest of the commentators don’t see it.

      1. James!

        I dont dispute that bareback porn is potentially damaging for the actors – not for the viewers, you cant catch HIV from a film

        1. What about influencing behaviour?

          1. Behaviour is about choices …

            Choices are not made by copying things – humans are not robots, we have a choice

            Thats why the answer is education not banning

            Not because I think bb porn is a good thing, but because it is impractical to ban

  22. James is a self loathing gay. Him and his circle are probably ex Catholic schoolboys who can’t reconcile their beliefs with their natural urges. Still it takes all sorts I guess.

    1. Rich from you of all people.

    2. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 11:45am

      Actually James! makes Very important valid arguements, I think deep down most agree with his sentiments in this one but it’s just not all see as it as easily black and white.

      He may get a little excitable and require a choccie biccie to calm down but at least he contributes to these threads and adds thinks to think about.

      However, unlike you Spanner, the hater of the word ‘community’, the hater of… well pretty much everything, he shows he actually cares a great deal about people and esp people in which this about is topic.

      1. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 11:46am

        Oh, bloooody ‘ell

        adds things to think…

        1. To be fair, the term “gay community” is overused. At most there are “gay communities” but even that’s probably overplayed. The word community tends to be abused by self-appointed community leaders.

          1. Couldn’t agree with you more there, Chuckster, though I’d say the word ‘community’ is mainly overused by those who want to pigeonhole minorities – I even came across “the Asian community” the other day (that’ll be everyone with origins anywhere from Turkey to Japan, then?)!

            Sorry, off-topic.

          2. Yeah I dont like the phrase gay community either – I tend to say LGBT communities – it doesnt quite work but its better than the former

        2. Whilst I dont agree with James! that banning bareback porn would be effective in reducing HIV that doesnt mean I dont see that he cares about the issue and wants to do something – and that should be valued

          1. Correction *do* see

    3. Cheers Jock

      Where is Spanner?

      1. Jock S. Trap 29 Mar 2011, 3:54pm

        Choccie Biccie?


  23. Dear PN Readers .We have now put an FB page for EndTheFear as a new LGBT rights movement.Please check it out and like,as well as share.Our videos are now there,thank you for your support so far.!/pages/EndTheFear/192381290801644

    1. Paddyswurds 30 Mar 2011, 9:40am

      ”End the Fear. Fend the Rear”. You can have that catch phrase for nowt but I want to be credited for it.

  24. ALL funding for things should be cut totally.
    People should start taking responsibility for their own actions and accept the consiquences for their actions.

    THT should be disbannded and as for Elton, that kid of his is going to be a total freak with Elton, Kenny and Lady Ga Ga in the picture.

    1. Tolerant fair and understanding as usual eh Bob

      Is this supposed to be evangelism for you – odd way to go about it – ah I forgot, logics not your strong point …

    2. Jock S. Trap 1 Apr 2011, 11:56am

      Oh Bob…

      …you sorry excuse for a human being

    3. Bob Wrote

      “People should start taking responsibility for their own actions and accept the consiquences for their actions.”

      Bob, it is a pity that you cannot practice what you preach, or see the irony in your statement.

    4. Yawn. Record? Change? Anyone?

      Bob the repetitive bore.

  25. If Elton really cares he will strongly advise the Coalition to withdraw prevention funds from the hopeless THT and GMFA and dispense them instead to the new HIV prevention organisation Status, which is finally putting out HIV campaigns that have got people talking again. Truthful, honest and hard-hitting in a way that nobody can seriously claim to stigmatise positive men – except those with a gigantic chip on their shoulder and forever wallow in playing the victim. The fact is, it is the lives of negative men we must consider here, regardless of how many of those with the virus may scream and wail that the truth hurts.

    1. @Rob

      I agree education should be particularly directive at the negative

      However that does not mean all resources should – for example newly diagnosed positive guys need good public health promotion too

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.