"Barebacking":: Intentional condomless anal sex in HIV-risk contexts.: Reasons for and against it
"Barebacking":: Intentional condomless anal sex in HIV-risk contexts.: Reasons for and against it
复制标题
DOI：
10.1300/j082v47n01_01
复制
发表时间：
2004-01-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Bauermeister, J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Carballo-Diéguez, A;Bauermeister, J
在艾滋病毒风险环境下的故意无套肛交（“裸背”）在同性恋圈子、同性恋媒体以及主流媒体（在较小程度上）中引起了激烈的争论。然而，它在科学文献中很少受到关注。为了更好地理解这种行为背后的原因，在Gay.com决定关闭公司赞助的无背聊天室之后，我们对互联网留言板上发布的信息进行了内容分析。这些人在他们的网上个人资料中发布的信息中，大多是居住在美国的白人/欧洲男同性恋者，平均年龄为35岁。在130条信息中，62条（48%）支持裸备份，55条（42%）反对裸备份，13条（10%）涉及其他话题。对信息内容的分析表明，支持和反对裸背的人都对艾滋病毒/艾滋病和艾滋病毒传播的风险有所了解。那些支持无套性行为的人认为无套性行为比带套性行为更令人愉悦（无论是在实际体验上还是在色情画面上），认为无套性行为赋予了一种自由感，将无套性行为的风险降到最低（假设从业人员已经感染了艾滋病毒，重复感染的风险很小），并最终认为无套性行为是一种个人决定和责任。那些反对裸背的人认为这种行为是危险的，提倡使用避孕套以及个人和社会责任，并认为裸背者需要对艾滋病毒疾病的负担敏感。讨论了这些结果的意义，指出了在这一领域进一步科学探索的必要性。
Intentional condomless anal sex in HIV-risk contexts ("barebacking") has been heatedly debated in gay circles, the gay media, and, to a lesser degree, the mainstream media. Yet it has received little attention in the scientific literature. In order to better understand the reasons behind this behavior, we conducted a content analysis of messages posted oil an Internet message board Following Gay.com's decision to close a company-sponsored bareback chat room. Individuals postin messages self-identified in their online profiles as being mostly White/ European gay men residing in the US, with an average age of 35 years. Out of 130 messages, 62 (48%) were pro-barebacking, 55 (42%) were against barebacking, and 13 (10%) referred to other topics. The content analysis of the messages showed that both those in favor of and against barebacking felt well-informed about HIV/AIDS and the risks of HIV transmission. Those in favor considered condomless sex more enjoyable than sex with condoms (both in actual experience and in erotic imagery), felt that condomless sex conferred a sense of freedom, minimized the risks involved in barebacking (assuming that practitioners were already HIV infected and that the risk of superinfection was small), and ultimately believed that barebacking was a personal decision and responsibility. Those against barebacking believed the behavior was dangerous, advocated for condom use and personal and social responsibility, and felt barebackers needed to he sensitized to the burdens of HIV disease. Implications of these results are discussed, pointing out the need for further scientific inquiry in this area.