Bill Weintraub:

We've reported on the relationship between oral sex and oral cancer before -- and I strongly encourage you to read that article.

But this is a new finding, and it accentuates the risk.

Significantly.

Last time around, evidence of HPV infection was found in 18% of the oropharyngeal tumors.

This time it's 72%.

And that's typical of what we've been seeing in prevalence of pathogens like HPV and other sexually transmitted infections.

It just keeps going up.

So:

I used to -- and I still do -- counsel our married guys not to do oral -- and that's because so many STD are transmitted via oral, which though usually treatable, can be spread to other people, such as wives.

But it's more than time that gay-identified guys woke up to the risks posed by the combination of gay male promiscuity, anal, oral-anal, and oral itself.

I'm well aware that most gay men think of oral as an entitlement.

But HPV and HIV and LGV and chlamydia and syph and gonorrhea and amebiasis and giardia and all the rest -- they're just not interested in your ideological stance on the sexual revolution.

They're going to do what they do.

And if you put yourself in harm's way -- you'll be harmed.

Also, I wouldn't bet the farm on this statement:

"People should be reassured that oropharyngeal cancer is relatively uncommon, and the overwhelming majority of people with an oral HPV infection probably will not get throat cancer," Gillison said.

That might be so for the general population.

But there's a dictum in science:

A change in quantity produces a change in quality.

So when we're talking about gay men, who are far more promiscuous than folks in the general population, and who get infected with multiple strains of high-risk HPV --

the equation changes.

Again, take a look at the pictures in Buttholes on Parade, and understand that guys are putting their tongues in those anal sphincters.

And their fingers and their dicks.

Pushing past the sphincter to reach the anus itself.

And that the rate of anal HPV among gay men is humongous.

95% of all HIV+ guys are infected.

57% of all HIV neg guys are infected.

And that was as of 2005.

I guarantee that HPV prevalence has not dropped since then.

The only place it can go -- is up.

Not only that, but when you compare rates of infection between women and gay men -- the figures are startling.

About 27% of American women are infected with HPV.

About 67% of American gay men are infected with HPV.

But -- and it's a big but -- there's another figure which is more important.

There are more than 100 strains of HPV.

Seven are considered high-risk for cancer.

The new vaccine, Gardasil, which in the US has been approved for use with women only, protects against infection by four of those seven strains.

But if you're already infected, the vaccine is USELESS.

Also note that the article says that HPV "is a common cause of death in men with HIV."

That should give you pause.

Particularly because we reported toward the end of March 2007 that HIV+ gay men are 90 times more likely to develop anal cancer than folks in the general population.

So HPV infection is not necessarily a walk in the park.

And look at these figures:

About 3.4% of American women are infected with one or more of the dangerous strains of HPV.

But 31% of gay men are infected with a dangerous strain.

And I guarantee that most of those guys are carrying multiple dangerous strains.

Because gay men are by and large far more promiscuous than women.

Again: look at Buttholes on Parade, understand that a lot of tongues have gone up a lot of asses, and understand that in doing that, they've become infected with HPV.

Which they'll then pass on to you.

Maybe through oral sex, maybe through oral-anal, and maybe just by kissing.

Now, let me, to be fair, present the view of a gay establishment writer about this.

This is Dan Savage, of Tiny and Stable fame, the guy who so consistently denigrates frottage, writing in his sex advice column this week about these new findings:

It [oral cancer]'s not a certainty; it's a risk. As with any pleasurable activity, sexual or otherwise, we weigh risks against benefits and make decisions. Smart folks minimize their risks -- by, say, using condoms for oral sex (har har) -- but most sexually active adults are likely to conclude that the real and immediate pleasures of oral sex are worth risking a distant and unlikely case of throat cancer.

Where have I heard this before?

Well, from quite a few people in 1981, 1982, and 1983, about AIDS, which at the time involved a tiny if not stable number of people, far fewer than have oropharyngeal cancer today.

Let me paraphrase:

"AIDS is not a certainty; it's a risk. As with any pleasurable activity, sexual or otherwise, we weigh risks against benefits and make decisions. Smart folks minimize their risks -- by, say, using condoms -- but most sexually active adults are likely to conclude that the real and immediate pleasures of sex are worth risking a distant and unlikely case of AIDS."

That is exactly and precisely how most people thought.

Of course Dan Savage isn't just "most people": he's the leading gay male sex-advice columnist, heavily invested in the status quo, and he depends upon people being promiscuous for his bread-and-butter.

That is -- MONEY.

And let's be clear -- this view, that the "benefits" of promiscuous "sex" are worth the risks, including HIV infection, is the standard analist view, because analism depends upon a pansexualist culture of sexual promiscuity for its existence.

I don't.

And I don't agree.

To the contrary.

I think it's time to recognize that the unrestrained promiscuity practiced by gay men over the last three decades has been a disaster in every respect.

I think It's time to look critically at the ideas and ideologies which have facilitated and enabled that promiscuity.

I think It's time to rethink what it might mean to be a Man who Loves Men.

Anal, promiscuity, and effeminacy have had their day.

It's time that Men returned -- to Phallus, Fidelity, and Masculinity.

Men who Love Men do NOT have to be promiscuous.

The idea that "MSM" -- "men who have sex with men" -- are inherently promiscous is part of the trash heap to which heterosexualization has relegated Men -- all Men.

This is what my foreign friend said -- and it sure bears repeating:

Gay males are among the most ardent supporters of heterosexualisation. They represent the dust bin created by the heterosexualised society to contain the mutilated / negativised remnants of male-male sex that survives after the intense oppression of them in the mainstream...

So:

Having suffered "intense oppression" in the mainstream of heterosexualized society, Men who Love Men are relegated to a trash heap which contains "the mutilated / negativised remnants of male-male sex."

Mutilated:

anal

oral

anal-oral

fisting

sado-masochism

All on display in Buttholes on Parade; and

Negativised:

Promiscuous, non-genital "sex" which swiftly deprives the Man of his Manhood.

Now, I know from experience that when I put up this sort of post, guys go -- oooooooooohhhh, he's criticizing promiscuity and oral.

That's right.

I am.

Promiscuity -- two articles:

Do Gay Men Have to be Promiscuous?

About Promiscuity, Str8 guys, Boytoys, and Men Who Love Men

Gay male promiscuity is NOT an expression of liberation;

it's an artifact of oppression.

Oral:

This site is about FROT.

Frot is the acme of sex between Men.

It's the peak.

The pinnacle.

It's not just mutually genital.

It's *directly* and mutually genital.

The genitals of both partners touch and rub.

They are directly, mutually, and simultaneously stimulated.

And direct, mutual, and simultaneous genital rubbing and stimulation is What Sex Is for 99.9% of the world's people.

Mutual fellatio -- 69 -- though not directly genital, is fine if you're in a closed relationship.

But the way most oral is presented to gay men is not mutual.

It's one guy servicing another.

And that's not okay.

Because then you're right back to some dopey and destructive dom/sub butch/bitch scenario.

Don't kid yourself about what's going on here.

The guy taking the HPV-laden cum is a BOTTOM.

He's playing an effeminized and submissive role.

His Manhood -- both metaphorically and literally -- has been forgotten.

He's receiving no genital stimulation other than what he himself may provide.

And by taking the cum he's endangering his life.

Anything and everything that was on the surface of the top's dick -- in now in the bottom's mouth.

If the top was sweating and stratched his balls and touched his cock, any ova or parasites drifting through his ass crack and down his testicles are now in the bottom's mouth.

Anything and everything that's in the top's semen -- is now in the bottom's mouth.

Including HIV.

And, as an extra added bonus, semen is immune-suppressive.

Just another little something to help those pathogens get a nice secure foothold.

In a place where they were never meant to be.

Look at this bottom's face:

He's handsome to be sure.

But he doesn't look happy.

You can see the discomfort.

He knows this isn't right.

Now look at this again:

No matter what the buttboys may claim --

There's NOTHING liberated about it.

It's an existence lived on the trash heap, in "the dust bin created by the heterosexualised society to contain the mutilated / negativised remnants of male-male sex that survives after the intense oppression of them in the mainstream..."

Mutilated.

Negativised.

That's what it is.

And yet you see this crap over and over and over again on the analist sites.

Look at it:

And look at this:

Is this

truly different from this?

No.

In both cases, the males have been reduced to sperm receptacles.

It's a culture of humiliation, degradation, and death.

Get real.

MAN2MAN

means PHALLUS2PHALLUS.

It doesn't mean dick to throat.

MAN2MAN

means PHALLUS2PHALLUS.

PHALLUS2PHALLUS

means MANHOOD2MANHOOD.

The ancients made an explicit connection between metaphorical Manhood and genital Manhood.

They were also keenly aware of the relationship between male-male aggression and male-male attraction.

In Polynices' extravagant lament over Tydeus' body, "the body he loved," says Statius, Polynices recalls,

the fine dispute of that
First night, those blows exchanged, and our brief rage,
The pledge of long affection...

"blows exchanged, and our brief rage, [were] the pledge of long affection"

The story of Polynices and Tydeus, and the poetry of Statius, comes out of a rich and complex civilization which openly celebrated the Love of Free and Heroic Men.

And which understood that Love.

Our era does not.

The images and models our era presents are negativised and mutilated.

They are images and models of subjugation and pain.

And they are not fit for FREE MEN.

The images and models we here present, by contrast, are those of Warriors and Fighters.

Free Men.

Heroic Men.

We defend the Warrior archetype -- the Warrior model.

And warn you against even the most subtle denigration it may suffer.

Because you need that model.

The Warrior band with its Warrior bonds.

That's what you need.

Not oral sex.

I'm Bill Weintraub.

This is The MAN2MAN Alliance.

JOIN US.

FIGHT BACK.

Bill Weintraub

© All material Copyright 2007 by Bill Weintraub. All rights reserved.