Why Is It Still Considered 'Cool' To Do Drugs In The Gay Community?

[Squirt]

I just think that there is something very specific about being gay that contributes to our own kind of alienation and self-hatred that manifests itself in excessive drug use and the other things I mentioned.

I think where we differ in our experience as a minority group is the splintering that happens after we come out to friends and family. Some families sever all ties, try to change you, or see you as a disgrace. Some friends feel betrayed, wonder if you lied because you had a crush on them, and feel they can never trust you again. Degragation or total loss of familial ties is devestating to any human being and leaves life long scars in many people. None of these aspects are part of any other minority group. This experience is unique only to the Gay community.

I'm tempted to look up drug use and STD statistic across various minority groups and cross reference them with the Gay demographic to see what the real deal is. A quick glance at the CDC hiv stats for 2005 shows the following:

Male-to-male sexual contact 18,939
Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use 2,190
Injection Drug Use 8,985
High-risk heterosexual contact* 13,486
Other** 540
SOURCE


So 22,471 cases of non Gay related HIV cases in America

vs

21,129 Gay related cases of HIV in America

Shame it's considered a Gay problem when the majority of cases were through heterosexual contact and non gay injection drug use.

I have a feeling some research on drug statistics and homosexuals might be surprising as well but I don't have time right now to research it so I'll keep an opened mind.

[XXXWriterDude]

I think where we differ in our experience as a minority group is the splintering that happens after we come out to friends and family. Some families sever all ties, try to change you, or see you as a disgrace. Some friends feel betrayed, wonder if you lied because you had a crush on them, and feel they can never trust you again. Degragation or total loss of familial ties is devestating to any human being and leaves life long scars in many people. None of these aspects are part of any other minority group. This experience is unique only to the Gay community.

I'm tempted to look up drug use and STD statistic across various minority groups and cross reference them with the Gay demographic to see what the real deal is. A quick glance at the CDC hiv stats for 2005 shows the following:

Male-to-male sexual contact 18,939
Male-to-male sexual contact and injection drug use 2,190
Injection Drug Use 8,985
High-risk heterosexual contact* 13,486
Other** 540
SOURCE


So 22,471 cases of non Gay related HIV cases in America

vs

21,129 Gay related cases of HIV in America

Shame it's considered a Gay problem when the majority of cases were through heterosexual contact and non gay injection drug use.

I have a feeling some research on drug statistics and homosexuals might be surprising as well but I don't have time right now to research it so I'll keep an opened mind.

Also, the fact that many of us had to hide our sexuality from our loved ones (something other minorities do not have to do) contributes to feelings of alienation, distrust and a general disconnectedness that is very specific to our community. Everybody has issues, but gay issues are very specific to our gay people. But if people want to keep singing "Everybody Hurts," that's fine, too. It's good to acknowledge that, in the end, we are all the same.

[Bill]

You folks must hang out in different circles than I do.

Alcohol concerns me, because I've seen so many people get hurt by it.

I haven't seen anything like the same danger caused by illegal drugs.

Prescription drugs used for illegal pleasure or relaxation, which are in kind of a gray area socially, have caused a lot more trouble than illegal drugs in my area.

I knew a girl, a stripper who worked in one of the local clubs, who died about two years ago from fentanyl - but if she hadn't been drunk, she wouldn't have taken it, and probably wouldn't have died, because of the synergy between cns depressants like alcohol and opiates, especially ultra-strong prescription chemicals like fentanyl.

However, the social and political climate makes it non-pc to say that alcohol is more dangerous than illegal drugs.

The biggest danger from illegal drugs is caused by their being illegal - so there's no quality control, there's a dangerous criminal economy, and people behave fearfully and covertly, and can't legitimately seek medical help without risking their freedom and security.

But, I recognize that this isn't a conversation that can be held rationally.

Much like the conversations about being gay, and wether or not gay men have the same rights as straight men.

[Sana Chan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2HipedgM3I

I think this explains it all. We should all pay attention to nature and what it can teach us. :snake:

[gaybucks_chip]

However, the social and political climate makes it non-pc to say that alcohol is more dangerous than illegal drugs.

No, it would actually be that the above statement, as already discussed, is not supported by the facts that makes it non-PC to say it.

The biggest danger from illegal drugs is caused by their being illegal - so there's no quality control, there's a dangerous criminal economy, and people behave fearfully and covertly, and can't legitimately seek medical help without risking their freedom and security.

This statement is simply not supported by the facts, and in this case the data is voluminous, from unimpeachable sources, and consistent over almost 100 years of data collection.

If your statement were correct, then why, after the lengthy experiment with legalization by both the Netherlands and Switzerland did both countries opt to re-criminalize?

Simple. In Switzerland, addiction rates skyrocketed, public health resources were strained, and crime increased due to the inability of the new addicts to pay for their addictions.

Opiates were legal in the US until the early 1900s, when the addictive nature of the drugs and the societal damages caused as a result became clear. Other countries followed suit.

If this were simply a political problem, then more socially liberal countries would have legalized the use of recreational drugs. But none have done so, and the ones that have legalized or decriminalized have, pretty much without exception, moved back toward recriminalization because legalization simply doesn't work and creates greater public health and safety problems.

But, I recognize that this isn't a conversation that can be held rationally.

Well, I think what you actually mean is conversations can't be held rationally when one party is presenting unsupported opinions as fact and the other side persists in interfering with the "rational" conversations by providing pesky facts that contradict the opinions.

I'm not arguing in favor of or against legalization or criminalization of drugs, nor am I in any way trying to defend alcohol as "better" than drugs. Both are dangerous, both can have severe side effects. But the data is clear on which substances pose the greater risks as far as addiction and health risks.

[Bill]

If your statement were correct, then why, after the lengthy experiment with legalization by both the Netherlands and Switzerland did both countries opt to re-criminalize?

Simple. In Switzerland, addiction rates skyrocketed, public health resources were strained, and crime increased due to the inability of the new addicts to pay for their addictions.

Not having lived there, I can't be sure, but the theory I read is that because surrounding countries retained prohibition, the problems of their illegal economies were transferred to the neighboring countries with less restrictive laws.

This has been one of the main effects of the drug wars and prohibition - the creation and transmission of criminal economies and increased health costs back and forth between countries all over the world.

I get your position - you disapprove of the illegal drugs.

You seem to believe that people can be forced to just stop using the drugs you dissapprove of, and forced to use the drugs you approve of.

After 80 years of ever more draconian laws, and the creation of the biggest prison system in the world, how do you think that's working out?

After funding vast criminal enterprises in south america, afghanistan, the far east, not to mention in europe and here in the states, funding terrorism, and justifying things like wholesale spraying of herbicides on the rain forest, when do you think these horrible drug takers will learn their lesson?

When do you figure you are going to be successful in forcing people to stop using the drugs you disappprove of - do you think another hundred years, and another 10 million prison sentences will take care of the people you dissapprove of?

When do you think we should start applying the final solution?

My position, based on my studies and years of involvement in both the club businesses and scenes, and the intellectual and art scenes, is that I worry about people intoxicated on alcohol far more than I worry about the people who have been taking the illegal drugs.

It's drinking that causes the disasters, the fights, the wrecks, and most of the deaths - the people who are high mostly just want to be left alone.

But I recognize my arguments of practicality won't have any effect on someone who has made a moral decision to approve of one drug and disapprove of others.

Much like arguments of practicality won't influence a person who hates the thought of a man having sex with another man.