Deciding who my “Idiot of the Day” today was pretty easy the minute I read this blog by Gus Kein.
First… I find it ironic that someone who titles his blog “Common Sense” would make the following statements:
Thankfully, as the 1990’s rolled on new drugs came about that allowed people to live with HIV and continue with their lives. HIV/AIDS became a chronic, manageable condition.
Yes… there have been great advances in HIV/AIDS medications and yes.. it has made their lives more manageable. But it obviously, if Gus Kein is any example, they havent made us any smarter. In fact… they have given people a false sense of security. Mr. Kein is NOT giving people an accurate representation of what it is like to live with AIDS.
But people cannot live in a crisis mentality forever.
No.. thats exactly what they need to do until a cure or a real vaccine can be found that actually works.
So here’s my confession. I’m Gus Kein and I’m a barebacker! Yes, I enjoy hot, steamy, wet, fluid filled sex with passion and abandon. I’m also HIV positive as are many of the people I play with.
And this is exactly why Mr. Kein is a dumb ass. Not only is he encouraging people to bareback.. he’s propagating the disease. He’s assisting in the spread of the disease and and very possibly the creation of strains of the disease.
His words and his actions speak for themselves. As far as Im concerned.. Mr. Klein may feel just fine signing his own death sentence but he should be tried for murder. Because he is a murderer. He is taking it upon himself to sign others death warrants by acting like a complete and irresponsible dumb ass.
Frankly… I find him utterly disgusting.
3 thoughts on “Idiot of the Day: Gus Kein”
Please, how can you declare someone a murderer? ……
We are each responsible for our own well being.
If someone makes the choice to have unsafe sex…..I’d be more likely to call it slow Suicide than Murder…..
He says…”as are many of the people I play with.” Never has a qualifier taken on such grave significance. If they’re all HIV positive, what does it matter? But if the ‘many’ excludes those who are not, and are unaware of his infection, then not only is he culpable, but of course, they are also now probably infected.
I didn’t mean to point out the obvious either. It’s just that it’s this process of exclusion of invisible others from the information being made available that fascinates. We are being asked to participate in an ambiguous scene, where perhaps the rules are already known by all the participants. Or perhaps not. There are assumptions within assumptions here: nothing is obvious in this picture.