Everyone on all sides of the COVID issue now partially or entirely distrusts the formerly trusted institutions (CDC, WHO, HHS, etc.) whose mission it is to protect us from plagues.
Whatever threat is posed in reality (yes, there is such a thing as reality) by MONKEYPOX is almost certainly going to be ignored on a mass scale.
Public Health in 2020: "Put a mask over your damn face when you're outside, you can't visit your dying grandma, and don't you dare go to church you bigot!"
Public Health in 2022: "Covering your mokeypox sores with gauze before you have a gay orgy might be a good idea... only if you want to of course."
22% of the cases of monkeypox are among gay men who go to sex parties. Right now, this disease could be eradicated in America if our public health people were functional. Alas, the sacred LGBT must trump rational public health -- closing sex festivals and telling gay men to keep in in their pants for a few months with strangers is just too much to ask. (To be clear, if there were a disease running rampant through Christian churches, I would support closing churches for a couple of months too.)
This disease is GOING to escape from this subculture. When it does, it will be the fault of our cowardly public health establishment.
Your article has an assumption of information that just doesn’t exist for the general public, much less specifically within the community you’re speaking of. Even just this line: “unless you are a gay man with multiple anonymous or casual sexual partners, you are probably not at much risk”… is that even true? Are gay men with anonymous sex partners 99% of cases? Or more like 60%? 40%? Which would still be proportionally higher, but not the “gay disease” this is made out to be.
The information from the CDC and city agencies has been all over the place. Personally I just don’t think anyone knows enough information about this disease, or at least that’s how it seems from how the communication has been trickling out (yet you seem to know things with absolute certainty?!). Just following @nychealthy on Twitter… Is this disease an STD, STD adjacent or is it truly any form of skin-to-skin (and possibly respiratory through coughing?!) contact?
What about people who frequently get massages and physical therapy (say in neighborhoods populated more frequently by gay men?)? Brushing up against someone in a tightly packed gym sauna or steam room? People getting manicures/pedicures, other spa treatments? What about public transportation, where people are back to squeezing in between other people on subway and bus seats without social distancing?
Monogamy is supposed to be the norm for heterosexual relationships, whether you are married or middle schoolers going to the roller skating rink together. One reasons why is that it reduces the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Obviously, there are lots of other reasons like knowing who the father of a child is and raising children in a family with their mother and father. And, just as obviously, there are lots of heterosexuals that don’t live up to this ideal, like at least two of the last five Presidents.
We decided that the differences between heterosexual and homosexual sex was not significant enough to justify excluding homosexuals from marriage. If that conclusion is correct, then why can’t society expect homosexuals to be as monogamous as heterosexuals?
Given the scores of different fecal-borne diseases and gut parasites, why don't we hear about outbreaks of gastrointestinal diseases from these mass sex events? Before AIDS was recognized, there was 'gay bowel syndrome', young men infected with multiple gut diseases which are normally found in the tropics. There is a substantial medical literature on the subject starting in the early 1980's up to the present but we never hear about it in the media. Why?
You mention the importance of offering shelter to anyone who tests positive to wait out their symptoms (using a rather condescending jab at gay lifestyle stereotypes to posit that some men need to “sell sex” to pay rent and eat, as if anyone who would end up needing said shelter must inherently be a prostitute)…. But then you don’t bother to consider that, if gay men heeded your advice and showed “restraint,” a result of that logically follows that the men who “sell sex” would therefore have a considerably diminished income, potentially leaving them in need of your proposed shelter anyway…. In this regard, those men would be better off WITH monkeypox than not - an irony that has long existed when it comes to HIV and medical insurance in many states. (In NYS, for example, a person with HIV and a low enough income receives free health insurance through the ADAP program, while a person without HIV but similar income would need to find another route for coverage).
It is beyond time for doctors to look in a mirror first - it is so obvious why public trust in medicine is extremely low, and none of this is going to change with doctors condescending and shaming the public. Throughout the pandemic, we are inundated with stories about doctor burnout, and how cruel and horrible life has supposedly become for them …. But their ability to make a living isn’t pulled out from under them constantly, and while you write about these gay events as if they are not at all important, it IS a fact that those are small businesses and that an already stigmatized community has members who rely on the income from these events after not having any of it for now over two years. You can judge and condescend and act as if “sex-positive” is trivial, but you have offered ideas that put the onus on those least equipped to carry that responsibility and you don’t offer ideas of how to sustain them until then. You instead say “free housing if you catch it” (because that worked SO well for COVID).
Look in the mirror, demand more from your colleagues and the CDC, and stop the condescension.
Dear Donald — First thank you for your to-the-point-analysis. However I think (if you’re trying to not stigmatize) small things like removing the quotes around “sex positive” (just call them orgies if need be) and referring to “gay male sex networks” (which sounds like a secret evil to me at least!) - would help make your case.
If you’re trying to get gays and owners of these “lucrative” events on your side - why not speak to them a bit more inoffensively. Lucrative is definitely a relative term — no one is becoming a millionare off of these specific sex events. And also - Bear Week is definitely the least hard-core sexual thing - so to pick on that seems over the top.
In the future, I would run your words by more folks who actually attend these type of events (I am happy to help).
For what it’s worth - in NYC - many of the specific sex parties have paused events for now - perhaps too late, but I think given the severity (it’s truly bad, but people are not exactly dead) as well as long incubation period - I think it’s not surprising.
On my part, I am telling everyone I know to get vaccinated and pause on the anonymous sex - and sharing the stories of my friends who have it to help motivate folks.
Thank you for doing your part in helping to keep us all healthy.
Don’t expect the legacy media to stop being PC and be honest about this almost exclusively being gay disease spreader. If this could spread through the air we would have thousands of more cases. It is almost exclusively spread through gay sex. All gay men need to do is restrain from sex with other men for 30 days and this monkeypox can disappear. We did the same thing with HIV by claiming that everyone had the same risk of getting HIV which was a lie. With COVID we got very PC by not honestly stating that getting Vitamin D from the sun only helps lighter skinned people. Darker skinned people should have been advised to take Vitamin D and C via supplements everyday. But this would be seen as “racism”. We have seen that being PC when it comes to viruses literally has gotten people to die.
I agree with much of what Mr. McNeil writes here. However, he was the science person of the NYT 3 or so years ago when they published an article about a NYC Health Dept physician working in the STI division about how unfair it was to ask gay men to use condoms now that there was PreP (pre-exposure prophylaxis against HIV). It horrified me when I read it. Yes, preventing HIV is a good thing but what about other sexually transmitted infections like syphilis, gonorrhea, HPV? At the time babys born with syphilis were increasing. PreP for HIV did nothing for other STI's and MSM sometimes have sex with females.
Maybe I missed it, but I did not see any counter arguments by Mr. McNeil.
As someone who was around during the AIDS epidemic, the gay community greatly modified their behavior and condoms became the norm and expected. The problem was the super long incubation period where what you did 10 years ago could affect you today.
With monkeypox it doesn't necessarily seem that any kind of extreme sex is required--it seems to just be spread by skin to skin contact which would even include more innocuous things like cuddling.
I'm not naive--there are a large percentage of gay men who engage in a very promiscuous lifestyle but I know many straight guys who are with a different woman every month but certainly not the majority.
I agree the information needs to spread to the gay community AND FAST. It happened during the AIDS epidemic--flysters, posters, ads for safe sex pretty much everywhere. Time to do it again. Date someone. Get to know them. Eventually have sex if the time is right--by waiting you'll know you're both monkeypox free.
The incubation period for HIV aid 6 months. Most people will get symptoms within 3 months. A very small percent of those with HIV are asymptomatic. HIV is still largely spread via gay sex or needle sharing.
Donald, Thank you for writing this article. Now, I have a better understanding of monkeypox and the risk it poses to our society. As you note, it is mostly common in the gay community but has the potential to spread to vulnerable people outside the community who may succumb to the illness. I notice, however, you do not criticize the gay men for engaging in indiscriminate sex acts during such a dangerous time. You do criticize the event planners, but not the participants. I’m wondering if you criticized people for not wearing masks and not getting vaccinated, because doing so could have spread the illness to vulnerable people? If so, where is the responsibility on the part of the men who participated in these orgies? Do they bear any of the responsibility for the spread?
Reading the story of McNeil’s cancellation (linked in the article) is pretty hilarious, a perfect storm of irreconcilable personalities.
Reading between the lines, a good psychologist could have a field day with McNeil’s narrative, which serves amply to hang him on his own petard. The phrases that spring to mind are ‘clueless’ and ‘self-serving’.
While I’m certain that his accusers are all equally clueless and entitled brats, McNeil himself comes off as an insufferable pedant who has a pathological need to dominate every conversation and sprinkle it with unnecessary and unasked-for witticisms, a nightmarish combination, in my own mind, of my spectrum-y scientist father-in-law and Alan Alda.
No wonder the 20-somethings ran screaming. The amazing thing is that anyone thought it was a good idea to put this guy in charge of a bunch of over-wrought kids in a challenging and extended tour.
For the first time ever, I felt some sympathy for Dean Baquet, trying to figure out how to deal with this difficult personality, causing havoc wherever he went.
Honestly, given that he has to try to keep up morale in a crowded and hopelessly woke newsroom, he may have made the right call.
A great career destroyed because he asked--in reponse to a kid's question--the context of someone using the N word? Originally suspended but then left after the ranting of Times employees? A psychologist could have a field day betting on your affiliations.
I doubt you read McNeil’s lengthy account of his travails - if you had, you’d see that it’s complicated, and that he admits that his own personality didn’t make the ordeal easier.
I happen to agree with McNeil’s politics, and disagree with the way he was treated. But it’s abundantly obvious from the text that he’s not an entirely reliable narrator and furthermore an aggressive gadfly by nature.
Just because you’re right, doesn’t justify your actions or behavior.
Everyone on all sides of the COVID issue now partially or entirely distrusts the formerly trusted institutions (CDC, WHO, HHS, etc.) whose mission it is to protect us from plagues.
Whatever threat is posed in reality (yes, there is such a thing as reality) by MONKEYPOX is almost certainly going to be ignored on a mass scale.
Thank you for this clear, detailed discussion.
I know this is late, but it's worth pointing out how corrupt our public health establishment is.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/kink-festival-monkeypox-Dore-Alley-17339435.php
Public Health in 2020: "Put a mask over your damn face when you're outside, you can't visit your dying grandma, and don't you dare go to church you bigot!"
Public Health in 2022: "Covering your mokeypox sores with gauze before you have a gay orgy might be a good idea... only if you want to of course."
22% of the cases of monkeypox are among gay men who go to sex parties. Right now, this disease could be eradicated in America if our public health people were functional. Alas, the sacred LGBT must trump rational public health -- closing sex festivals and telling gay men to keep in in their pants for a few months with strangers is just too much to ask. (To be clear, if there were a disease running rampant through Christian churches, I would support closing churches for a couple of months too.)
This disease is GOING to escape from this subculture. When it does, it will be the fault of our cowardly public health establishment.
Your article has an assumption of information that just doesn’t exist for the general public, much less specifically within the community you’re speaking of. Even just this line: “unless you are a gay man with multiple anonymous or casual sexual partners, you are probably not at much risk”… is that even true? Are gay men with anonymous sex partners 99% of cases? Or more like 60%? 40%? Which would still be proportionally higher, but not the “gay disease” this is made out to be.
The information from the CDC and city agencies has been all over the place. Personally I just don’t think anyone knows enough information about this disease, or at least that’s how it seems from how the communication has been trickling out (yet you seem to know things with absolute certainty?!). Just following @nychealthy on Twitter… Is this disease an STD, STD adjacent or is it truly any form of skin-to-skin (and possibly respiratory through coughing?!) contact?
What about people who frequently get massages and physical therapy (say in neighborhoods populated more frequently by gay men?)? Brushing up against someone in a tightly packed gym sauna or steam room? People getting manicures/pedicures, other spa treatments? What about public transportation, where people are back to squeezing in between other people on subway and bus seats without social distancing?
Monogamy is supposed to be the norm for heterosexual relationships, whether you are married or middle schoolers going to the roller skating rink together. One reasons why is that it reduces the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Obviously, there are lots of other reasons like knowing who the father of a child is and raising children in a family with their mother and father. And, just as obviously, there are lots of heterosexuals that don’t live up to this ideal, like at least two of the last five Presidents.
We decided that the differences between heterosexual and homosexual sex was not significant enough to justify excluding homosexuals from marriage. If that conclusion is correct, then why can’t society expect homosexuals to be as monogamous as heterosexuals?
Given the scores of different fecal-borne diseases and gut parasites, why don't we hear about outbreaks of gastrointestinal diseases from these mass sex events? Before AIDS was recognized, there was 'gay bowel syndrome', young men infected with multiple gut diseases which are normally found in the tropics. There is a substantial medical literature on the subject starting in the early 1980's up to the present but we never hear about it in the media. Why?
Once again, thanks for an insightful look at a potential problem without going into hysterical
Gobbely Gook.
You mention the importance of offering shelter to anyone who tests positive to wait out their symptoms (using a rather condescending jab at gay lifestyle stereotypes to posit that some men need to “sell sex” to pay rent and eat, as if anyone who would end up needing said shelter must inherently be a prostitute)…. But then you don’t bother to consider that, if gay men heeded your advice and showed “restraint,” a result of that logically follows that the men who “sell sex” would therefore have a considerably diminished income, potentially leaving them in need of your proposed shelter anyway…. In this regard, those men would be better off WITH monkeypox than not - an irony that has long existed when it comes to HIV and medical insurance in many states. (In NYS, for example, a person with HIV and a low enough income receives free health insurance through the ADAP program, while a person without HIV but similar income would need to find another route for coverage).
It is beyond time for doctors to look in a mirror first - it is so obvious why public trust in medicine is extremely low, and none of this is going to change with doctors condescending and shaming the public. Throughout the pandemic, we are inundated with stories about doctor burnout, and how cruel and horrible life has supposedly become for them …. But their ability to make a living isn’t pulled out from under them constantly, and while you write about these gay events as if they are not at all important, it IS a fact that those are small businesses and that an already stigmatized community has members who rely on the income from these events after not having any of it for now over two years. You can judge and condescend and act as if “sex-positive” is trivial, but you have offered ideas that put the onus on those least equipped to carry that responsibility and you don’t offer ideas of how to sustain them until then. You instead say “free housing if you catch it” (because that worked SO well for COVID).
Look in the mirror, demand more from your colleagues and the CDC, and stop the condescension.
Dear Donald — First thank you for your to-the-point-analysis. However I think (if you’re trying to not stigmatize) small things like removing the quotes around “sex positive” (just call them orgies if need be) and referring to “gay male sex networks” (which sounds like a secret evil to me at least!) - would help make your case.
If you’re trying to get gays and owners of these “lucrative” events on your side - why not speak to them a bit more inoffensively. Lucrative is definitely a relative term — no one is becoming a millionare off of these specific sex events. And also - Bear Week is definitely the least hard-core sexual thing - so to pick on that seems over the top.
In the future, I would run your words by more folks who actually attend these type of events (I am happy to help).
For what it’s worth - in NYC - many of the specific sex parties have paused events for now - perhaps too late, but I think given the severity (it’s truly bad, but people are not exactly dead) as well as long incubation period - I think it’s not surprising.
On my part, I am telling everyone I know to get vaccinated and pause on the anonymous sex - and sharing the stories of my friends who have it to help motivate folks.
Thank you for doing your part in helping to keep us all healthy.
Are recipients of blood-derived medicines at risk?
Don’t expect the legacy media to stop being PC and be honest about this almost exclusively being gay disease spreader. If this could spread through the air we would have thousands of more cases. It is almost exclusively spread through gay sex. All gay men need to do is restrain from sex with other men for 30 days and this monkeypox can disappear. We did the same thing with HIV by claiming that everyone had the same risk of getting HIV which was a lie. With COVID we got very PC by not honestly stating that getting Vitamin D from the sun only helps lighter skinned people. Darker skinned people should have been advised to take Vitamin D and C via supplements everyday. But this would be seen as “racism”. We have seen that being PC when it comes to viruses literally has gotten people to die.
I agree with much of what Mr. McNeil writes here. However, he was the science person of the NYT 3 or so years ago when they published an article about a NYC Health Dept physician working in the STI division about how unfair it was to ask gay men to use condoms now that there was PreP (pre-exposure prophylaxis against HIV). It horrified me when I read it. Yes, preventing HIV is a good thing but what about other sexually transmitted infections like syphilis, gonorrhea, HPV? At the time babys born with syphilis were increasing. PreP for HIV did nothing for other STI's and MSM sometimes have sex with females.
Maybe I missed it, but I did not see any counter arguments by Mr. McNeil.
Still, I think his firing by NY Times was horrid.
As someone who was around during the AIDS epidemic, the gay community greatly modified their behavior and condoms became the norm and expected. The problem was the super long incubation period where what you did 10 years ago could affect you today.
With monkeypox it doesn't necessarily seem that any kind of extreme sex is required--it seems to just be spread by skin to skin contact which would even include more innocuous things like cuddling.
I'm not naive--there are a large percentage of gay men who engage in a very promiscuous lifestyle but I know many straight guys who are with a different woman every month but certainly not the majority.
I agree the information needs to spread to the gay community AND FAST. It happened during the AIDS epidemic--flysters, posters, ads for safe sex pretty much everywhere. Time to do it again. Date someone. Get to know them. Eventually have sex if the time is right--by waiting you'll know you're both monkeypox free.
The incubation period for HIV aid 6 months. Most people will get symptoms within 3 months. A very small percent of those with HIV are asymptomatic. HIV is still largely spread via gay sex or needle sharing.
So happy to see you publishing Mr. MacNeil!
Donald, Thank you for writing this article. Now, I have a better understanding of monkeypox and the risk it poses to our society. As you note, it is mostly common in the gay community but has the potential to spread to vulnerable people outside the community who may succumb to the illness. I notice, however, you do not criticize the gay men for engaging in indiscriminate sex acts during such a dangerous time. You do criticize the event planners, but not the participants. I’m wondering if you criticized people for not wearing masks and not getting vaccinated, because doing so could have spread the illness to vulnerable people? If so, where is the responsibility on the part of the men who participated in these orgies? Do they bear any of the responsibility for the spread?
Reading the story of McNeil’s cancellation (linked in the article) is pretty hilarious, a perfect storm of irreconcilable personalities.
Reading between the lines, a good psychologist could have a field day with McNeil’s narrative, which serves amply to hang him on his own petard. The phrases that spring to mind are ‘clueless’ and ‘self-serving’.
While I’m certain that his accusers are all equally clueless and entitled brats, McNeil himself comes off as an insufferable pedant who has a pathological need to dominate every conversation and sprinkle it with unnecessary and unasked-for witticisms, a nightmarish combination, in my own mind, of my spectrum-y scientist father-in-law and Alan Alda.
No wonder the 20-somethings ran screaming. The amazing thing is that anyone thought it was a good idea to put this guy in charge of a bunch of over-wrought kids in a challenging and extended tour.
For the first time ever, I felt some sympathy for Dean Baquet, trying to figure out how to deal with this difficult personality, causing havoc wherever he went.
Honestly, given that he has to try to keep up morale in a crowded and hopelessly woke newsroom, he may have made the right call.
A great career destroyed because he asked--in reponse to a kid's question--the context of someone using the N word? Originally suspended but then left after the ranting of Times employees? A psychologist could have a field day betting on your affiliations.
What do you think my affiliations are?
I doubt you read McNeil’s lengthy account of his travails - if you had, you’d see that it’s complicated, and that he admits that his own personality didn’t make the ordeal easier.
I happen to agree with McNeil’s politics, and disagree with the way he was treated. But it’s abundantly obvious from the text that he’s not an entirely reliable narrator and furthermore an aggressive gadfly by nature.
Just because you’re right, doesn’t justify your actions or behavior.