if i had a day with Dermot I really wouldnt want to spend it fishing!
Ladies and Gentlemen, the next item in our auction catalog is “Catch of the Day!” should raise a few….. hands!
Thanks for pointing that out, Martyn.
I was in a rush and read the story too quickly and have been telling all my friends and colleagues that a day’s fisting and cocking with Dermot was on offer!
A bit disappointed to have to set them straigth about Dermot, quite literally!
Second prize is two days with Dermot O’Leary.
I think he is SO hot. I have a major crush on him. I bet it’s huge too ;)
What the hell for?
Gay marriage? The STD dating site√ stdster.,.c0m, the gay subscribers increased continually.
Most of them are sexy.
Handsome guy, Dermot O’Leary. I enjoy seeing him when he presents the X Factor but I have just read his profile on Wikipedia. It turns out that he is a bit straight. The Terrence Higgins Trust could do better with auctioning days with the likes of John Barrowman or Derren Brown instead.
The THT’s annual revenues are over £22 million and it is actually sitting on a surplus of a couple of hundred thousand pounds, so what to do with this extra cash?
THT seems to exist as much as a money-making machine as anything and is not providing optimum value for money for its service users when most of the money is spent on maintaining a lucrative portfolio of properties around London and saleries in excess of £100k for its executive committee.
How does it justify these exhorbitant corporate-sized costs?
Wouldn’t it be more noble for execs like Nick Partridge to club together and fund some badly-needed new HIV initiatives aimed at gay teens new to the scene who, having had no HIV education at school, are clueless about what HIV is or how it is transmitted?
Do we not owe it to the incoming generation to learn from the recent past and equip them with the best tools possible to navigate them safely around our increasingly commercially sexualised and self-absorbed gay scene?
Does it hurt talking outta your tired old ass -
thousands of people not just gays have benefited from the amazing work THT have done in the last 25 yrs – you want more education in schools – go and whinge to the department of health
I’m not denying that at all, JD, but they could be providing even more if more of the money they raised was apportioned to service users to improve their quality of lives further and on the appalling level of HIV prevention itself, which Mr. Partridge is always claiming is woefully underfunded.
Impressive sleight of hand there!
I don’t understand how they constantly claim they need funding from the government for new campaigns and this and that when they spend so much money on outrageous salaries, pension schemes, buildings/overheads, jolleys, you name it, and have a vast cash surplus to boot which they maintain they keep on hold for a rainy day.
Hello? Look outside chaps. It’s not only raining, it’s hailing thunder claps and hail stones the size of snow balls!
Our community’s sexual healthcare and wellbeing is ever deteriorating, yet the HIV charities that soak up what scant funds there are have their eyes set firmly on the next fundraising initiative!
Well more fool Dermot!
We expect this from you Samuel, but as you have zero understanding of Statutory and charitable funding streams and how it is spent, how are you best placed to make the comments you do.
Prevention campaigns are commissioned by local and regional health authorities and by DoH and as we know if the commissioning intentions are misguided and underfunded then you do not get the best outcomes.
All bluster and no substance yet again, I notice that outfit you seem to support are still to produce anything . THT are due to release another initiative in the next few weeks aimed at testing guidelines, again something you will criticise in your usual manner.
Tell me something oh font of all HIV and THT wisdom knowledge, W6?
WHY is the THT always waiting around for the DOH to commission (pay) it to run each successive HIV campaign?
Isn’t this the crux of the problem?
The THT itself moans that the government via the DOH is not putting enough money into HIV prevention.
SO WHY THE HECK ISN’T T.H.T. APPORTIONING SOME OF THE MONEY IT RAISES FROM THESE POSH GALA FUNDRAISING EVENTS AND GOING IT ALONE?
Or is is umbilically attached to the DOH in some way instead of being the genuine charity it professes to be?
Weren’t charities, once, independent organisations that set out to raise funds to achieve their objectives?
Why are they so beholdened to the government for funding for various initiatives when they also raise funds with celebrities’ help?
Why aren’t these funds being used to safeguard our community’s health, and what ARE they being used for instead?
A visit to their lavish properties around London will reveal all…
Total Charitable Income (personal donations, fundraisers, investment income) totalled £6.1 million to March 2011. I do not think that much would be acheived by this level of funding.If you feel that no tax payer funding should go to any HIV Service Providers and the DoH, Local and Regoinal Governmennt should do this work “in house” then you are entitled to that opnion. I believe that there is more waste in local, regoinal and national goverment departments and take the view that HIV charities are better placed to serve local populations.
You seem to have such a blinkered view regarding HIV services, could this be because you have no personal experience at all in this area, and therefore are out to just make cheap political points. Funding for HIV services is under threat and do you really think that £15million of tax payers money is sufficient to support people living with HIV up and down the country, and provide some sort of prevention campaign – be realsisitc Samuel!!!!!
What is your solution Samuel, how would you organise HIV services on a nationwide scale for 22million? Please remember to include the complete remit and not just concentrate on your very blinkered point of view.
THT accounts for Yr ended March 2011 : Revenue = £21.16million Expenditure = £22.08million. Therefore THT spent £920,000 more than it got in. The salaried staff costs were £833,000 which compared to the revenue equates to 3.9% staff costs.
The pension liability for 2011 is £120,000 which if you add this to the salary staff costs makes total staffing costs of £953,000 or 4.5% of total revenue. This information is very easy to get from the Trustee Report and as I’m sure you would agree if I can understand such a report, then anyone can (including you,assuming you have any commercial knowledge).
THT have reseverves of £7.34million as at March 2011 – this would allow the charity to function for 4 months should it loose all its funding (the “risk statement” is clearly explained in the Trustee report).
If you dispute these figures Samuel, please provide your alternative analysis – which for a retail manag should be very striaght forward for you to do in your tea break!
Let me turn that around to you, W6.
Examine the accounts more closely and tell me what proportion/percentage is allocated to HIV prevention?
And how much is allocated to providing HIV services?
And how much is allocated to actual costs of running the THT?
Precisely. An unnecessarily exhorbitant amount is wasted, yes, wasted on absurd costs to fund the lavish working conditions of THT staff.
WHY do they need lavish offices in prime central London when they are also holding their hand out to the government to fund much-needed HIV prevention campaigns?
Notice the injustice here?
Our community health deteriorates further while THT execs pamper themselves at our expense.
Haven’t they noticed we have entered an age of austerity?
I can only imagine, as reality bites, that even more of the scant funds they provide to prevention and services will be needed to maintain their fat cat lifestlye.
Samuel why not just place the figures you ask for here and prove me wrong? Or are you unable to undertand a basic trading statement?
If you dispute any of the figures, then place your evidence up here for all to see. One third of the expenditure was spent on HIV prevention, which is approximately £7.3million for the year ended March 2011. This is a pittence Samuel so rather than complain about the charities / service providers contact your local MP and ask for more money to be spent on HIV – or dig into your own pocket and contribute to the coffers.
You are obsessed with THT / GMFA / NAT – why is this? If you are so concerned about these organisations why not do something about it – lobby them, become a trustee etc…………..writing here will not solve the problem, actions speak louder than words!
Can things be done better? – of course they can, and better commissioning of services would be a start and for the Govenement to invest in prevention rather than pay lip service to it.
“Let me turn that around to you, W6.” – why don’t you do some in depth analysis before you write the inacurate information on this comments thread? On what basis do you dispute the figures I have shown here Samuel – if they are wrong then by all means provide the evidence to prove your point! A trading statement is not something you can “have a gut feeling about” as well you should know!
(Area manager to Samuel – what was your top selling line this week? Samuel to Area Manager – My gut feeling was pink feather boas, hardly a way to analyse a business effectively).
Actually, W6, you will notice I have not been on here much this week as it is London Fashion Week, which is always crazy!
I have been flitting from the fashion boutique I run in one on London’s well-known department store to various fashion shows and parties across town with nary a moment to glance at PN.
So I do not have time right now to go into the intricacies of how THT chooses to apportion its income or how it accounts for the fact that it sits, Fort Knox-like, on a cash pile of seven squillion quid.
That’s enough to keep THT running for four months if everything went belly up, you say? Enough to pay the mortgages on their lavish portfolio of high-end properties, perhaps…
Come on, W6! If everything went belly up, I’d wager THT would do a UK Coalition and blow the lot on fripperies and bloated final salary pay checks before doing a midnight flit, before landing revolving door gold-plated jobs in the Department of Health, just as did the former head of UKC.
Or even GSK!
So basically it’s all HIV organisations you have an issue with? For a humanitarian you have a strange way of showing this………but you are entitled to your rather odd opinions.
It must be very difficult to live in a world where everything is a conspiracy and there are no people in the world that can be trusted to do the right thing and who are passionate to improve the life of others……..it must be lonely on that high horse of yours Samuel.
So glad you are busy, it seems there has been a much better atmosphere on the various comments threads without your agitation and bullying, with others able to make comments unhindered by your unwelcome interventions.
It is for the reason I am a humanitarian that I abhor what HIV charities have become, and the oath they swear to political correctness as their ideeology for serving the gay community.
Just a look at a few of the doctrines of PC from the HIV sector’s PC training handbook tells us all we need to know how we have been deceived and why HIV conversion rates are higher than ever:
a) Doing the reverse of what common sense would dictate
b) Paying scant lip service to the HIV-neg community while focusing most resources and efforts on the needs of pos men
c) Not telling the truth in case it offends
d) Changing language where it is perceived to offend
e) Doing exactly the opposite of what you preach
f) Actively exacerbating a problem wherever it arises
g) Label as “conspiracy theorist” anyone who questions PC’s agenda
h) Conjure up ‘isms’ with which to label attitudes that questions PC’s functional ability
i) Use robotic language like “positive outcomes” wherever possible
I suspect the real problem you have Samuel is that you are some one who complains that HIV has been “de-gayed” and expect charities like THT to focus solely on gay men, and Sid everyone and everything else.
THT has developed into a National Sexual Health Charity, no organisation can stand still particularly in the current climate, like it or not individuals must take responsibility for thier health, including thier sexual health. A very large proportion of gay men are not testing as often as they should and this is a big problem which you do nt seem to understand.
The simple fact is there will never be a situation where condoms are consistently used by all gay men. 30 years of HIV has shown us that, if as you seem to intimate being PC means allowing gay men the freedom to have the sex they want, then so be it.
Not everyone is you Samuel with your puritanical and controlling view of life.
Yes, like PC is now giving the excuse for 13 year old girls to be surgically implanted with contraceptives at school without their parents’ consent.
Justify that, W6, and don’t even begin to insult me by claiming it is for their own good!
PC in itself exists to blur and diminish all moral boundaries so that people simply forget or no longer know the difference between right and wrong, and are out for their own selfish means withour respect or regard for how their ends may affect others.
And we see that today in the sexualisation of our scene where gay men now routinely f%ck with abandon and there are as many sex establihments as there are non-sex establishments for gay men to pursue this insane objective.
The truth is that this has been achieved by a tiny minority of extreme left-wing sociopaths who have wormed themselves into positions of authroity, thus enabling them to rewrite the moral code of ethics to achieve their objectives to feralise and debase society in their own image.
HIV testing as I have repeatedly explained to you till I am blue in the face is a red herring, because the objective of testing every single gay man and putting those who test positive onto HIV drugs can never be achieved. Fact!
Yet you seem greatly disturbed by this simple fact, because as part of the HIV establishment you seem determined that every gay man should – must – come forward for testing, come what may.
This atitude is used to deflect from the need for effective HIV prevention campaigns, which history has shown is the most effective detterent for stopping the spread of the virus.
Yet as with the advent of campaigns that advocate the “withdrawal” method and push PEP as if it is some panacea to unsafe sex, HIV testing is akin to applying the condom long after the horse has shot its load, sorry, bolted.
HIV charities seem to now be reinforcing the inevitability of contracting HIV, and so are doing sod all to address the real sexual health needs of gay men who are still neg.
It is interestng that you always quote from the margins to make a general point. I would agree that the example you give relating to contraception is concerning, it this the norm in general – I would say no. Why quote extreme examples to ake your point Samuel, you do this time & time again, and it makes you appear like an extremist.
You will surely appreciate that society in general has become increasingly sexualised not just the “gay scene”. I nor you should be taking the moral highground, and I have to say you seem to portray many gay men like sheep and not being able to think for themselves in that they are lured by this small group of PC individuals and somehow brainwashed – now that is what I call “group think tactics”.
I have a liberal attitude to most things in life, who am I to judge the actions of others when I know I am far from perfect and have never suggested otherwise. I have a clear understanding of right & wrong and suspect most people do.
I’ve also explained to you previously why I think this is.
Because politically correct charities, which are largely run by pos men, are almost zealously determined to stamp out HIV stigma:- a cause which runs in direct conflict with the genuine need to reduce HIV infection rates.
While I do believe that HIV stigma is nothing like it was 20 years ago, the greatest stigma pos men feel today is from other gay men, not the mainstream populace.
To that end, and as has occurred in gay metropolitan ghettoes throughout the US where an HIV pos status is the norm, I do believe that there is a subconscious perception in the HIV sector that the only way to reduce HIV stigma is for HIV itself to become normalised and, therefore, the equal or dominant status.
That is why the cause to reduce HIV stigma is mutually incompatible with the need to reduce HIV rates. Yet the same charities are being tasked to deal with both problems.
THAT’s why they have long given up the ghost to reduce HIV rates.
Yes Samuel he have heard all ths before many many times…….we know you are not interested in anything other than preaching at gay men rather than engaging with them.
Prevention is much more than gay press ads and other small media campaigns. Take the time to educate yourself about modern prevention strategies and then form a view rather than rely on out of date perceptions and gut feelings.
No more from me on this, there is no point having yet another long one on one debate – you live in your “bubble” and I will take my chance with expert opinion, scientific & medical evidence accumulated over the past 30 yrs.
Thanks for acknowledging the point I made about the 13 year olds being surgically implanted as being alarming, W6, but there’s a genuine correlation with what is occurring there to what has and is occurring in the mindsets of those who guide HIV prevention policy in the UK today.
Such policies, as I say, seem, at least on the face of it, to serve a moral purpose.
Let’s take PEP as an example and compare it to the reason provided for the schoolgirls being surgically implanted:- vis a viz to possibly prevent the onward HIV conversion of someone who slips up or has unsafe sex/to prevent schoolgirls becoming pregnant.
But what such methods actually encourage is the increased uptake of unsafe sex and the increase of promiscuous behaviour among schoolgirls:- way in excess of the positive benefits these policies were introduced to thwart.
Perfect examples of e) and f) in the PC training handbook list mentioned above and of how moral boundaries are blurred to feralise and debase society.
“Take the time to educate yourself about modern prevention strategies and then form a view…”
Isn’t that the point, W6? I have, and I have.
Just because something is modern, or “progressive”, does not mean it is necessarily better or more effective than what went before.
Quite the opposite in fact.
Many of our once-proud institutions are now on their needs because of the drive to “modernise” this and that.
Look below the surface and all that “modern” in the political liturgy of recent times is to bureaucratise with an autocratic zeal while practising political correctness as the central doctrine.
The results are always disastrous.
Why do you persist in maintaining that the policies that govern HIV prevention today are the right ones?
How are they right, exactly?
Where are they succeeding in preventing the spread of the virus when the evidence tells us they are not?
Only the PC disciples tells us they are the right policies, and a) and b) above reveals why they are not.
PS: Saying all of that, it is good that we really are debating this time around and not jumping down each others’ throats! :)
“THT has developed into a National Sexual Health Charity, no organisation can stand still particularly in the current climate…”
And do you know WHY THT sold out and became a mainstream HIV charity, instead of the one set up exclusively by gay men for gay men?
Because it realised that it could apply for bigger grants and funding catering for the mainstream population also:- particularly the influx of African immigrants who comprise the bulk of heterosexual HIV-pos people in the UK.
And in the process services aimed at gay men have been scandalously watered down and even axed ad hoc in a bid to boost profits, opps, sorry, “cash reserves”.
And how about how the THT has swallowed whole regional HIV charities and now spreads itself into other areas of mainstream sexual health also, bidding for just about every contract that has an STI tied to it in order to hoover up every last crust it can?
The THT stopped being a charity years ago. It now resembles a greedy, predatory conglomerate!
“…like it or not individuals must take responsibility for thier health, including thier sexual health…”
Like your erstwhile colleague Stu, you are shown to have a selective PC filter that chooses to absorb only the data you have been programmed with while discarding anything that doesn’t compute.
You go on and on about how individuals must take responsibility for their health:- a siren call from the days when individuals were properly equipped with the correct and appropriately-pitched information from which they had the freedom to make informed decisions about their sexual health.
Today, individuals at risk aren’t receiving the same level or effectiveness of information as they were in the 1980s and ’90s.
So how on earth do you presume they can take responsibility for their health?
Based on what knowledge, exactly?
Individuals aren’t being taught about HIV at schools, and they certainly aren’t being educated about what it is nor what a pos diagnosis implies on the gay scene.
Whilst not wishing to get into a lengthy debate, but I am interested to know waht you mean by this:
“what a pos diagnosis implies on the gay scene”.
Sorry, I ran out of space and had to truncate the last sentence.
I am simply referring to gay men incoming to the gay scene, particularly youngsters recently out of school who are largely ignorant about what HIV is and therefore remain largely ignorant about it even after years of being out and about.
They pick up these scene mags and see lots of ads promoting often sleazy kinds of sex, fetish venues and all the rest of those elements that have contributed to the “sexification” of our culture often endorsed by sexual “health” charities themselves.
Yet that overload is not being balanced or correctly addressed with information about what HIV is, the consequences of infection, or much serious information on how to invoid infection.
Indeed what HIV campaigns and safe sex info there is out there is either extremely lightweight and frivolous:- certainly not impactful or anything that is likely to strike a chord or stick in the mind.
Hope that explains what I mean in more detail, W6.
I don’t think it is just young gay men who have to navigate an increasingly sexualised society, the same argument can be used for all adolescents and young people.
I remarked to a friend only last week, that there is no meaningful information in the gay press these days, Boyz and QX are full of adverts and no real content to speak of. It is a shame that editors are not including informative content in these magazines.
I am of the opinion that we all have to make our way in life and I do not feel it is my place be the moral compass for the gay scene. Where do we draw the line in terms of fetish clubs, Internet hook ups etc etc. are we not in danger of becoming a nanny state and wrapping youngers up in cotton wool?
In terms of HIV information in my experience gay men know the risks but for whatever reason decide that some risks are worth taking. A recent example is that a young guy was living in London for a short time, he noted how careful he was when having sex as he knew the risk of infection in London is high.
He eventually returned to his home town where he admitted that his diligence about safer sex was very much reduced, because his perception of the risk was lower and therefore although he knew he was taking risks, he felt he would be safe, relative to beng in London. He is the first to admit he knew the risks and that he coud have avoided becmng infected.
Another young man felt he had a good run of 8 years of not becoming infected and engaging in high risk sexual activities. He knew the risks he was taking, but in some respects repeated negative test results reinforced his risky behaviour.
Behavioural change is the most difficult & costly strand of HIV prevention, but it is essential.
Some woud say risk taking behaviour is an inherent part of gay culture – multiple partners, sex clubs, saunas, sexual experimentation etc. Personally I don’t think gay men are that different from their hetrosexual counterparts, the big difference is the prevelance of untreated HIV among gay men.
A recent study in SF suggests that 50% of new infections come from undiagnosed individuls which is very concerning. If the same pattern were found in the UK it woud mean that 1500 infections last year came from the 26% of undiagnosed indviduals.
I am a humanist at heart, science and evidence are the cornerstones of my world view, and that is not likely to change. There is more that can be done in prevention methods, but it requires a funding commitment and the will of gay men to come together to protect each other. A the moment I do not see much appetite among gay men to unite against HIV.
Hi W6, I entirely agree with you that society has undergone a process of sexualisation in many forms, but that should in no way excuse the lack of effective education about HIV and safe sex aimed at gay men.
Our objective, as concerned gay men, remains how to find a way to encourage gay men to navigate their way around the seemingly endless direct and subliminal messages littered throughout gay culture today seemingly imploring us to have sex willy nilly while remaining mindful of the risks that remain.
Yes, we all have to make our own way in life and fend for ourselves, and sometimes the best lessons people can learn are from the mistakes we make along the way, and we should be left to make those mistakes from which to learn and grown instead of being rescued all the time.
But there are clearcut examples where a degree of “nannying”, for want of a better word, is necessary:- above all else where health and well being are concerned.
I would agree that most if us are intelligent…
enough to recognise the threat posed by HIV and unsafe sex, but there are also those we owe it to – the plainly ignorant, misguided, weaker-willed, gay men with learning difficulties, etc. – to ensure they are equipped with the information and tools they require to understand the full implications of what an HIV diagnosis entails.
That, surely, is the basis of any civilised society:- to ensure that all have access to potentially life-threatening information rather than assuming that all gay men must be aware of the risks involved with HIV.
The blasé-ness with which those three 20/21-year-old porn actors who acquired HIV on a shoot several years ago responded to a Newsnight reporter’s questions was symptomatic of the type of men I refer to.
Yes, they knew about HIV, but in their eyes it was no big deal because…
the word on the scene – as promulgated by the sexual health charities – was that meds are readily available and they will ensure a normal, healthy lifespan.
You don’t hear such claims being made by these charities today because of the outcry such rash claims provoked, yet neither do you hear the same charities making official statements condemning bareback porn or wanting to engage in open debates with those who oppose their handling of HIV prevention.
You and others say well, if you don’t like it then apply to be on the board of the THT or volunteer for GMFA, but you must surely know it not as simple as that unless you are prepared to sell your soul on the shrine of political correctness.
This is the oath by which all who work for these charities must swear by, as documented time and time again. Open minds are not welcome where minds are already made up and the consensus set about what approach works best.
Yet, it is this same approach that has consistently yielded counter-…
productive results, year after year after year.
Surely a fresh way of looking at the problem of record HIV rates would be to start think outside of the box and maintain an open mind about all possible solutions.
If those wielding the HIV prevention budgets just had the courage to step outside of the narrow confines of the box they have hemmed and marginalised themselves into from years of programming themselves to think in a limited – i.e:- politically correct – way and started thinking for themselves, and not being scared of what others thought, that would be an incredible step forward.
To put it simply, I mean tuning into your conscious mind and asking yourself “does this feel right to me on a compassionate/spiritual/humane level, or do I just think this way because that is what I have been taught and told is the right way without really questioning whether it is the right way or, indeed, whether it has a basis in reality?”
I know entirely what you mean when you say you don’t…
feel much of an appetite among gay men to engage in the battle against HIV.
Couldn’t that be because there is no one leading that battle where, surely, the funded preventionists should be taking the lead?
Also, some of your despair may, like me, be from living in London and getting a microscopic look at how blasé attitudes are among certain groups of gay men you may see out and about or mix with.
From the case studies you describe you appear to be in contact with a number of gay men who are seemingly resigned to the prospect of contracting HIV sooner or later.
Recent HIV campaigns which appear to reinforce the inevitability of contracting HIV may even be an influencing factor here.
But the inner city represents just one community of gay men, within which exist a subset of men who will be drawn to situations and circumstance wherein choices around safe sex figure more predominantly than others living in the same city or out in the suburbs, countryside, seaside, wherever…
I do think there is a danger that we allow are own personal experiences to form a wider picture that does not necessarily exist.
There will always be someone somewhere contemplating unsafe sex.
But equally there will be someone somewhere who may make a decision to always practise safe sex based on a well-targeted and appropriately themed HIV campaign that is impactful while not coming across as stigmatising to most pos men.
If we give up the battle now we give up the fight to reach those gay men who just need a lead, a green light, a deterrent, an incentive, whatever, to play safer always without fail.
I agree that the will does not appear to be there, which is why this provides such a fantastic opportunity for the HIV charities to step top to the fore and embrace this challenge as their own and radically shake-up HIV prevention int his country.
W6, I entirely get your heartfelt compassion in seeing HIV rates come down:- exactly the same as mine, but just approached from…
I have never been asked to swear an oath as you suggest. My views on HIV are just that, my views and have not been influenced by THT or any other HIV organisation.
I’m not sure where your information comes from but I can honestly say that there are sme very progressive people involved in organisations such as THT. Change will only happen if change is demanded. I think it is wrong to assume that individuals cannot make a difference in large organisations.
More importantly gay men shoud be demanding more yet there seems to be no appetite to be concerned about sexual health – individuals like me who are open about HIV are often viewed with mistrust and having an agenda – this simply is not the case, other than to try and get gay men talking openly and frankly about HIV as things stand today……
This has been a far more enjoyable and satisfying debate to engage with you in, and it has been genuinely interesting to read your postings, particularly the last three which I really felt.
There has to be a way of marrying the tick box approach to HIV prevention, which is largely tied to scientific research and sex survey data, with a more holistic, out-of-the-box methodology.
Indeed, I am convinced that such an approach holds the key to sending HIV rates among gay men back into reverse.
What do you think?
Dermot’s good looking, he’s a decent bloke, but this smacks of pandering to straight folk. But, on the flip side, Dermot’s a sound bloke for stepping up!
I think given that Dermot has a high profile amongst many different sectors of the population is a a good thing he is involved in this fund raising activity. HIV has no boundaries, so it is important to be as inclusive as possible, and if that is perceived as “pandering to straight folk” so be it. Whilst HIV has the highest prevelance amongst Gay and African populations in the UK, there are many other sub groups that benefit from the work THT do.