A Kink/Fetish Too Far?

I have a friend who's been writing erotica with me for a while, one of her recent story breads involved people having 'dangerous sex' with men and women who are HIV positive

The stories obviously cover much risky behaviour. I was just wondering if this subject would be a 'no-go' area. I imagine it would be for being 'sexually irresponsible.' But considering so many stories deal with unsafe sex or incest I think most would take it to be the 'dark' fantasy that it's intended to be.

Risky behaviour?
More like a criminal act, to my mind

I'd immediately close such a story, but given how much crap gets written here that I want no part of, I'd hardly be shocked. Shake head; move on. At any rate, I don't see the appeal and that's putting it mildly.

It's a criminal act here in Oz. We've had a number of court cases convicting people of knowingly infecting victims. Don't know if any went so far as man-slaughter though, certainly grievous bodily harm.

Don't know what Laurel's stance would be - it would be her call.

I think she's referring to bugchasers--people who intentionally seek out and get infected with the virus. The one person I knew who contracted the virus this way said that he considered it inevitable that he'd get HIV at some point (he was a crack-addicted [at the time] gay male), and he wanted to get sick on his own terms.

I'm sure there's a risk game factor to it, too. Like pregnancy risk sex... just infinitely more awful and life-altering.

EverLux said:

I'm sure there's a risk game factor to it, too. Like pregnancy risk sex... just infinitely more awful and life-altering.

Click to expand...

You misspelled life-ending.

This is not a kink I think many would enjoy.

electricblue66 said:

It's a criminal act here in Oz. We've had a number of court cases convicting people of knowingly infecting victims. Don't know if any went so far as man-slaughter though, certainly grievous bodily harm.

Don't know what Laurel's stance would be - it would be her call.

Click to expand...

I wasn't, nor has my friend writing about those people who go out to infect people with HIV for whatever reason, but for the people who have sex with infected, or at risk people for the thrill of it.

There is a sadly growing subset of people that do this and considering HIV and AIDS is such a part of our sexual landscape it shocks me how little people discuss this in erotica. Or perhaps as a good Scottish writer once wrote "Erotica is the ultimate form of escapism as it often bears no resemblance to the real world we live in."

EverLux said:

The one person I knew who contracted the virus this way said that he considered it inevitable that he'd get HIV at some point (he was a crack-addicted [at the time] gay male), and he wanted to get sick on his own terms.

Click to expand...

Well, that's the saddest and sickest thing I've heard. Inevitable? HIV is 100% preventable. If you're so broken you can't say no to an unprotected cock or dirty needle, you're too broken to live in the world unaided, and need to be getting professional help. I hope he got it. Given that society is determined to help people who get sick and the cost of treating HIV is quite high, it's not simply his life he was pissing away - it's resources other people desperately need and arguably had better claim to. Not to mention the risk of infecting others. Yeah, I see this guy as somewhere between utterly evil, and helplessly shattered by chronic depression. Either way, he should have been in-patient somewhere.

Sorry to be harsh, but if it really happened that way, there was a massive fuckup in his friend network. Someone should have slapped him silly and gotten him help before he got himself an expensive fatal illness.

electricblue66 said:

It's a criminal act here in Oz. We've had a number of court cases convicting people of knowingly infecting victims. Don't know if any went so far as man-slaughter though, certainly grievous bodily harm.

Don't know what Laurel's stance would be - it would be her call.

Click to expand...

Laws vary by state, but depending on where in .au, having unprotected sex isn't necessarily illegal if the HIV+ person disclosed that status. Roundup here: http://hivlegal.ashm.org.au/index.p...-professionals/safe-behaviours-and-disclosure

Deliberately infecting somebody would come under GBH if not covered by something more specific. Manslaughter is pretty much moot these days in Australia; thanks to public health and antiretroviral treatments, almost nobody dies of AIDS here any more.

Black_and_White_Writer said:

I wasn't, nor has my friend writing about those people who go out to infect people with HIV for whatever reason, but for the people who have sex with infected, or at risk people for the thrill of it.

There is a sadly growing subset of people that do this

Click to expand...

Citation needed on that one. I've seen these claims of "bug chasers" but most of them seem to be mythical, people who get off on the fantasy but don't pursue it IRL.

Bramblethorn said:

Citation needed on that one. I've seen these claims of "bug chasers" but most of them seem to be mythical, people who get off on the fantasy but don't pursue it IRL.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the great posts Bramblethorn.

I've caught some documentaries on the subject detailing it.

Bramblethorn said:

Laws vary by state, but depending on where in .au, having unprotected sex isn't necessarily illegal if the HIV+ person disclosed that status. Roundup here: http://hivlegal.ashm.org.au/index.p...-professionals/safe-behaviours-and-disclosure

Deliberately infecting somebody would come under GBH if not covered by something more specific. Manslaughter is pretty much moot these days in Australia; thanks to public health and antiretroviral treatments, almost nobody dies of AIDS here any more.

Click to expand...

But who pays for the drugs for a mixed-up crazy who has deliberately infected himself (or, for that matter her-self). Are they so cheap?
And only manslaughter ?

Handley_Page said:

But who pays for the drugs for a mixed-up crazy who has deliberately infected himself (or, for that matter her-self). Are they so cheap?
And only manslaughter ?

Click to expand...

I do not know, I suppose they would be treated the same as everyone else.

My story was far more of a fantasy where the virus is more 'manageable' with drugs.

Well this was enlightening. I used to think the only think I could never read would be flat out rape scenes.

I was wrong, there is no way I would want to read something like this. I could not even fathom how this could be erotic.

My thought is these people are ill in the same way people who 'cut' or get piercings to the point its disfiguring. They want to cause themselves harm. They need professional help and like I feel about rape, its nothing that should be romanticized or made 'sexy'.

Erotica is nothing BUT risky sex, internal cumshots, unprotected sex with multiple partners who are total strangers, rough anal that IRL could cause fissures that lead to riskier stuff, etc. I thought that was the point; we read and get off on these stories because they express carnal fulfillment that's too much of a gamble to seek in reality.

Bringing HIV into it would not only be a huge turn-off for me, but also bring in that bleak reality I'm trying to escape from. I like reading about these fictional sluts and cum guzzlers in part because they're having fun. I would like for them to continue having fun, and thus would prefer that the viruses and lice stay on this side, thanks.

Handley_Page said:

But who pays for the drugs for a mixed-up crazy who has deliberately infected himself (or, for that matter her-self). Are they so cheap?

Click to expand...

In public health it's generally not helpful to try to separate people into "innocent" and "deserving" patients. That tends to discourage people from seeking diagnosis/treatment or from being honest with their doctors, all of which are important to preventing further spread of infection.

Antiretroviral therapy doesn't just help the patient who receives it; it also greatly reduces their chances of passing on that infection to anybody else. So it's better for the community just to treat everybody who needs it, instead of trying to assess who deserves treatment.

In the USA, treatment for HIV costs around $10-20k a year per patient (including other costs, but ARV is a big part of that). I don't have numbers for Australia; I think it might be a little cheaper because of how pharmaceutical prices are negotiated here, but I could be wrong.

So, it's not cheap, but it's cheaper than the alternative (letting more people get infected, and having to treat full-blown AIDS). Somebody on ARV can work and get on with life, so a lot of that cost comes back through their taxes, instead of needing to pay benefits for somebody too sick to work.

NB the total rate of HIV infection for Australia is about 1000 new cases/year; it's still an important health issue, but not a big-ticket item compared to the costs of say smoking or alcohol.

And only manslaughter ?

Click to expand...

It'd depend on the circumstances. Under Australian law, murder requires an intent to kill (plus premeditation); if you kill somebody through recklessness or negligence that would be manslaughter.

There was a case back in 1990 where a prisoner stabbed a warder with a HIV-infected needle; the warder eventually died but by then the prisoner was already dead, so there was nobody to charge.

Even if he'd still been alive, I'm not sure it would have been prosecutable as murder or manslaughter. Until the mid-1990s most states had the year and a day rule, which meant you couldn't be convicted of homicide for an act that happened more than a year before the death. I don't know whether the repeals of those laws applied retroactively.

MayorReynolds said:

Erotica is nothing BUT risky sex, internal cumshots, unprotected sex with multiple partners who are total strangers, rough anal that IRL could cause fissures that lead to riskier stuff, etc. I thought that was the point; we read and get off on these stories because they express carnal fulfillment that's too much of a gamble to seek in reality.

Bringing HIV into it would not only be a huge turn-off for me, but also bring in that bleak reality I'm trying to escape from. I like reading about these fictional sluts and cum guzzlers in part because they're having fun. I would like for them to continue having fun, and thus would prefer that the viruses and lice stay on this side, thanks.

Click to expand...

Well, that's one take. Sometimes erotica is a journey inward and all about self-discovery. The fact that women are drawn to stories where the inward travel involves a lot of dark territory is sort of my stock in trade here, but when I look at my stuff it's pretty much free of most of the stuff you mentioned - and it rates ok.

I agree though. A story where, in the end, people can't live happily with what they discover about themselves is a bleak story. Everything I write amounts to some variation on HEA. Disease and death play no part of my stories, and won't ever unless I was specifically trying to make a point about HIV. And that lecture's already been given by people more qualified than I.

MayorReynolds said:

Erotica is nothing BUT risky sex, internal cumshots, unprotected sex with multiple partners who are total strangers, rough anal that IRL could cause fissures that lead to riskier stuff, etc. I thought that was the point; we read and get off on these stories because they express carnal fulfillment that's too much of a gamble to seek in reality.

Bringing HIV into it would not only be a huge turn-off for me, but also bring in that bleak reality I'm trying to escape from. I like reading about these fictional sluts and cum guzzlers in part because they're having fun. I would like for them to continue having fun, and thus would prefer that the viruses and lice stay on this side, thanks.

Click to expand...

Great post.

But I want to add that all the things you mention first-and I'll toss in another, the infamous ass to mouth- are things that as you said are risky, but the average person still engages in them and of course porn stars are really at risk especially the anal issues.

But there's a difference between a 'risk' that involves a slightly unpleasant side affect and one that you're talking potential life and death. Not to mention once these bug chasers contract the disease, what's the next phase? Spreading it? When people can get hurt-and worse-that's when even the fantasy is no longer a fantasy.

And as for escapism? That's what it is all about here. I get some negative feedback sometimes when I bring in aspects of reality such as addiction, abuse and even the real consequences of incest.

For instance in one story I had the father find out his son had x-rated pictures of his mother that he'd lifted from the father's draw and scanned them to his computer. The father lost his mind-which would be realism-and smacked the kid in the face and threatened to throw the kid out of the house.

Realistic? Of course. But do people want that here? Nope. That story was a contest entry that still finished at 4.80 had I not had that scene it could have won as I'm sure I got a lot of knee jerk bombs from that.

MayorReynolds said:

Erotica is nothing BUT risky sex, internal cumshots, unprotected sex with multiple partners who are total strangers, rough anal that IRL could cause fissures that lead to riskier stuff, etc. I thought that was the point; we read and get off on these stories because they express carnal fulfillment that's too much of a gamble to seek in reality.

Bringing HIV into it would not only be a huge turn-off for me, but also bring in that bleak reality I'm trying to escape from. I like reading about these fictional sluts and cum guzzlers in part because they're having fun. I would like for them to continue having fun, and thus would prefer that the viruses and lice stay on this side, thanks.

Click to expand...

That's the most eloquent way of putting it down. I admit when my friend told me what they were writing and asked me to come up with a few ideas, they all revolved around being set in the 'near future' or the criminal underworld (where the folk who'd do this for video/photoshoots would gravitate) but I only found one slant where when reading more into it, the fact that some drugs in HIV positive people enables them to have sex that is as 'risk free' as most of other people (I still can't believe the science and imperial data behind this, especially with semen staying in the female body for up to 3 days), but by adding a more sci-fi bent to that would make it more acceptable erotic fantasy wise.

However what always prevented me from pursuing it is the fact people can be so stupid to try this sort of thing.

lovecraft68 said:

Great post.

And as for escapism? That's what it is all about here. I get some negative feedback sometimes when I bring in aspects of reality such as addiction, abuse and even the real consequences of incest.

For instance in one story I had the father find out his son had x-rated pictures of his mother that he'd lifted from the father's draw and scanned them to his computer. The father lost his mind-which would be realism-and smacked the kid in the face and threatened to throw the kid out of the house.

Realistic? Of course. But do people want that here? Nope. That story was a contest entry that still finished at 4.80 had I not had that scene it could have won as I'm sure I got a lot of knee jerk bombs from that.

Click to expand...

I can relate to that.

When I wrote my sapphic incest "I'll Be Home For..." trilogy, I came up with an implausible scenario to keep it keep it all-girl and explain the attraction: that something in the Callahan bloodline going way, way back gets female family members hot and bothered for each other—but only the women. In the midst of this, the main character's Uncle Harry is flabbergasted. He is not part of the incest, wants no part of it, and finds all the females banging each other to be squeamish at best. He's decided to stick with the main character's aunt because he loves her despite it all, but deep down he feels sad and betrayed.

I put Uncle Harry in there because despite all the familial shenanigans, I wanted to show a consequence of IRL incest by having this poor guy feel the wrong end of it all. This did not go well. Commenters were upset about Harry. They either wanted him to join in the action or felt depressed and shitty after the story and orgasm were over. Harry ended up being a serious buzzkill. He makes a re-read tough because of the twist that he is sad and hurt.

For story # 3, I put him on a motorcycle and sent him on a trip for the entire duration. He was a plot device intended to make a point, but nobody wanted him there, and in retrospect I probably should have left him out to begin with.

I'll revise what I said earlier, though. There's nothing wrong with exploring dark themes or going to shadowy places. Escapism is an appealing factor but it is only one factor. If bleakness is necessary for the story but readers don't like it, tough shit for them. The # 1 rule of writing is that there are no rules.

Still, I'll stick to my guns on the HIV/bug chasing theme. Gross. Not for me.

I think that would make a good story. Lots of people have self-destructive impulses bound up with their sexual impulses, and wanting to contract AIDs doesn't shock me or put me off. It's a sort of snuff-fetish.

The combination of prudishness and prurience exhibited on this site almost makes me laugh.

NoJo said:

I think that would make a good story. Lots of people have self-destructive impulses bound up with their sexual impulses, and wanting to contract AIDs doesn't shock me or put me off. It's a sort of snuff-fetish.

The combination of prudishness and prurience exhibited on this site almost makes me laugh.

Click to expand...

Thank you, I find that ironic as well. Perhaps one of the most destructive and for myself distasteful things I can imagine is incest.

Tellingly it's the most popular category on Lit.

Black_and_White_Writer said:

the fact that some drugs in HIV positive people enables them to have sex that is as 'risk free' as most of other people (I still can't believe the science and imperial data behind this, especially with semen staying in the female body for up to 3 days)

Click to expand...

Several things happening there.

1 - As viruses go, HIV is not very infectious. For comparison, needlestick injury from a patient with hepatitis B has about a 50% chance of causing infection; with HIV it's about 0.3%*.

2 - HIV transmission has a lot to do with viral load (how much virus there is in your blood). A big part of HIV treatment is monitoring viral load and keeping it low with antiretrovirals. Done right, ARV therapy will reduce the viral load so low that it's undetectable, which makes it pretty close to impossible to transmit to anybody else. Somebody who's recently been exposed to HIV can take antiretrovirals to reduce their chances of infection.

(As a side benefit from anti-HIV research, we now also have good medications against cold sores.)

3 - These days there's also PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis), medication people can take BEFORE possible HIV exposure that will greatly reduce risk of infection.

Put those together and even without barrier methods (condoms etc.) sexually-transmitted HIV is now almost entirely preventable in places with functional healthcare systems.

I'm not encouraging anybody to take chances with HIV; it's still a serious, lifelong condition, and personally I still use barriers if playing with anybody other than my long-term partner. But it's less terrifying than it used to be.

*unless vaccinated for hep B, which y'all should be.

Bramblethorn said:

Several things happening there.

1 - As viruses go, HIV is not very infectious. For comparison, needlestick injury from a patient with hepatitis B has about a 50% chance of causing infection; with HIV it's about 0.3%*.

2 - HIV transmission has a lot to do with viral load (how much virus there is in your blood). A big part of HIV treatment is monitoring viral load and keeping it low with antiretrovirals. Done right, ARV therapy will reduce the viral load so low that it's undetectable, which makes it pretty close to impossible to transmit to anybody else. Somebody who's recently been exposed to HIV can take antiretrovirals to reduce their chances of infection.

(As a side benefit from anti-HIV research, we now also have good medications against cold sores.)

3 - These days there's also PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis), medication people can take BEFORE possible HIV exposure that will greatly reduce risk of infection.

Put those together and even without barrier methods (condoms etc.) sexually-transmitted HIV is now almost entirely preventable in places with functional healthcare systems.

I'm not encouraging anybody to take chances with HIV; it's still a serious, lifelong condition, and personally I still use barriers if playing with anybody other than my long-term partner. But it's less terrifying than it used to be.

*unless vaccinated for hep B, which y'all should be.

Click to expand...

Thank you, that was the kind of angle the characters I am writing about look at the issue from.