Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 3:52 AM
Mon Nov 30
18 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email | Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Email
Lizzie Skurnick
Email
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/19/09
I have Genital Herpes. (HSV2, not HSV1 on the genitals) I have been with my current partner for 6 years, he does not have it. I did not know I had it until 2 years ago, when I had my first outbreak, which was admittedly pretty painful and awful. I have no idea who gave it to me or when. I have always had protected sex.
It is not that bad now. I still get outbreaks, which are more of an annoyance than anything else. This is not to say that other people do not have painful, frequent recurrences, especially those that are immunosupressed. But the large majority experience a decrease in both outbreaks and intensity over the years.
A lot of these comments (especially from the commenters who don't have herpes-- which, btw, some are sure to make clear in the language of their posts!) reproduce the "ZOMG HERPES" shame-inducing rhetoric that makes the herpes the #2 most stigmatized STI after HIV (When I was diagnosed, my doctor made sure to tell me that the stigma I would experience was a lot harder to deal with than the actual virus, and I've found that to be true).
Herpes has become a central talking point in abstinence-only education programs and is deployed as a harmful scare tactic, specifically against teen girls. There is a Facebook group called "Abstinence: Because Herpes is a Terrible Wedding Present." Abstinence-only Physician/Author Miriam Grossman gripes that "It's easy to forget, but the characters on Grey's Anatomy and Sex in the City are not real. In real life, Meredith and Carrie would have warts or herpes." In response to rumors circulating that Rihanna gave Chris Brown herpes, many jumped to Brown's defense, like one NY Times commenter who claimed to "have NEVER heard of a situation where a guy just hits a woman for no reason!!! She obviously did something to piss him off. I heard that she gave him herpes. If thats true, what man wouldn’t be pissed off!!! There is NO cure for herpes. Where I come from, she’s lucky to be alive!!!" (And believe me, this guy isn't a lone wolf. I have dozens I've found like this, and not from fringe sources, either.)
SO: we have herpes used as a scare tactic to push an abstinence-only agenda that the stats prove puts teens MORE at risk for STIs, and as a legitimization of violence against women.
To make a long story short: sure, let's acknowledge that it sucks, and it sucks REALLY hard for a small fraction of those that have it. But the bigger issue is the way that it's being used as an anti-feminist rhetorical tool. And as far as I can tell, a lot of the comments on here play right in to that rhetoric.
And don't even get me started on the bogus 'this is why so many societies want women (ahem!) to be virgins until they're married' crap downthread. BLARGH!
Sorry, I may be oversensitive right now because it's an issue I am actively dealing with. Phew, ok, I'm done now.
11/19/09
The stigma is the worst (though I do not want to downplay the pain that some sufferers have to deal with)
I've had two men, after being told I had herpes, basically treat me like a leper and want nothing to do with me when prior to sex becoming a topic, though I was "god's gift to men"
Oh well, I figure it may weed out the douchebags in that someone who understands its not the worst thing ever (!) may be worth something themselves.
11/19/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
So for all you 'uninfected' out there, ask your Dr. directly about this.
11/19/09
11/19/09
Fuuuuck.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
The worst is the splatterers--YOU KNOW who you are. You are the reason that none of us can sit down, because you get more piss on and around the seat than my eight year old nephew. Here's a rhyme for you:
"If you sprinkle
when you tinkle,
Please be neat
and wipe the seat."
I would like to graffiti that on every public restroom in the United States (and Canada, just for you lisas).
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
Be careful out there.
11/19/09
But there are always people who are so adament about having sex with as many people as possible (OMG, sex with hot guys is like, the most important thing EVERRR!!11! And, like, the herp is no big deal!) that they are willing to pooh-pooh any evidence that the old rules may be the best when it comes to sexual behavior. Their obtuseness would be laughable if it didn't possess an underlying deliberate ignorance that is frightening as well.
11/19/09
I'm paraphrasing Dan Savage on all of this, but 'the Herp' ISN'T a big deal as long as you track your cervical health to make sure you don't have a cancerous strain. Massive percentages of men and women have it, even if they don't know(and many, many don't). Being monogamous is great, but this only helps if the person you're monogamous with doesn't already have herpes.
Sex is great. There will always be risk with sex, but, once again: Sex is Great, and if you're smart about it, you can minimize that risk and still enjoy it.
Sure, I can follow the 'old rules' and only sleep with someone I'm going to marry, and that will mitigate risks. If he's a 100 percent faithful, which is a leap of faith. (That's a different discussion, of course, and how realistic it is to expect everyone to be monogamous.) And maybe that'll happen(once divorced, lovin' the single life)! But not anytime soon. That's not obtuseness. That's a CHOICE.
Just like most of us choose to get in cars everyday. What can happen in those is far scarier to me, but, hell, I'm not going to stop driving. Or leaving my house to go where the scary people can get me.
You make your lifestyle choices and risk decisions, I make mine. Please don't try to make me out to be an idiot because mine are different.
11/19/09
And, also, WOMEN were expected to be monogamous for the above reason. Men almost never ever were, historically. Equal opportunity monogamous expectations is a new thing, and hardly universal. And so men would bring their diseases home.
Actually, all you have to do is read extensive stories of African women with sexually transmitted diseases/HIV to see how this is still what happens.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
You're right, and I know this(obviously only sometimes)! Thank you!
11/19/09
#tips
11/19/09
I've had every boyfriend tested for STD's and so, I can only guess that HSV-1 isn't considered an STD and therefore, did not show up on the report? Does anyone know why this
may be?
Frankly, while I'm pretty smart about things, I honestly didn't know you could get genital herpes from someone with oral herpes.
11/19/09
Hmmm, but many indigenous societies also practiced having many wives for one husband, especially if he was rich/a leader. Which means any disease would spread among all the wives. I'm not sure the prevailing attitude was not to screw around too much. And I do believe the paternity concern is almost global; the whole evolutionary passing-on-genes thing.
And on the ideal, well, what's 'ideal'? If people aren't comfortable with monogamy, and if they are unable to just sleep with one person for the rest of their life, that is not ideal for them. I am naturally very monogamous, but I certainly don't think that's true of everyone.
There's a reason people cheat, and cheat a lot, and it's not a moral - which is a value judgment - failing. Sleeping with one person the rest of our life if you're not 100 percent sexually compatible all the time for many decades is impossible for many people. It never has worked as a universal, and it never will.
And we're back to the fact You're only as protected as your partner in most long-term relationship.
Safe sexual practices, such as condoms, choosing who you're going to sleep with carefully, and only doing certain things with trusted partners greatly, incredibly cuts down on STDs.
The spread of STDs is going through the roof in this country among young people, and it is because of abstinence education, aka an attempt to teach kids that they should be monogamous the rest of their lives without teaching them how to be safe regardless. I do believe the pluses of monogamy should always presented, but I disagree it's an ideal for everyone, and that those who are not good at it should be shamed.
I know you're saying you don't like the gendered aspect of the old rules, but I truly believe the only modern difference is that women often are as openly promiscuous as men.
11/19/09
11/19/09
Heh, I just got called out on that above, you are right! *Flinches for her brain fart*
11/19/09
But in the main, most human societies have definitely not considered casual sex and double- or triple-digit partners over a lifetime as an ideal. Ours doesn't either, not quite, but for many it's not a huge deal from a moral standpoint if you sleep around a lot (otherwise Sex and the City would not have been such a popular show).
My main point is that our culture has largely gotten rid of the moral/religious obstacles to casual sex, etc. but seems to have forgotten about the health issues, which were perhaps the purpose of the old rules in the first place.
11/19/09
[www.sfcityclinic.org]
11/19/09
Does this NOT concern anyone? Considering oral can transmit to genital?
I guess it bothers me only because I got it and had been reliant on STD testing to ensure all was "clear"
humph!
#tips
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
I kind of agree with badmutha, though. The majority of people who have it don't suffer like your roommate did, and while I definitely think we need to work hard to prevent the spread of it so those who would be severely affected don't have to suffer, the degree of stigma, shame, and trauma associated with having it at all is excessive given the actual health effects for most people.
11/19/09
The good thing is that over the years, the frequency of outbreaks can decrease -- to the point where you even forget you have it. But I would never deny how traumatic it can be in the early stages, especially for someone who is not in a long-term monogamous relationship and has to explain the condition to every potential partner. That part sucks.
11/19/09
11/19/09
I don't understand with all these mini crotch critters breeding like crazy people still won't wrap their junk up during sex. It takes less than a min to avoid a lifetime of uck.
Sorry but I don't feel like playing a lifelong game of zoo tycoon on my cunt.
11/19/09
#tips
11/19/09
And yes, for a lot of people herpes is a relatively minor infection. But for some people it's brutal, so I absolutely hate it when I see people taking the attititude "oh, it's just whatevs for me, so I don't have to use condoms or tell anyone." Because while it might not affect YOU too badly, you might infect someone for whom it IS a serious health problem (or they might unknowingly pass it on, etc).
11/19/09
"lifetime of uck" and "zoo tycoon on my cunt" reflects the stigma attached to herpes, genitals, and sex. In my experience I have found the stigma far more devastating than the physical discomfort of an outbreak.
11/19/09
One thing I hated about HS sex ed. was the prevalent deterrent for having unprotected sex was the shame associated with having an STD. Instilling this attitude in people is what causes these diseases to be spread so widely.
I've known a lot of friends who have either been too scared or ashamed to tell a doctor about their symptoms, lest they be judged as "dirty" or "slutty." One of the girls just basically ignored her first flare-up and was so in denial that she didn't go to her Dr. and gave Herpes to her longtime boyfriend.
It doesn't have to be that way. There is a happy medium between shaming and scaring everyone into celibacy and being totally blithe about the disease. In fact, the people who are so judgy about it are the ones who cause the blitheness in others, because if it weren't for the stigma, people wouldn't be ashamed to be open about having the disease.
11/19/09
I think it's simply a respect thing. You disclose potential health risks to partners. Because these health risks can affect you finincially, mentally, and physically.
I disclose to people I'm dating I am bipolar. I give them the option, with knowledge on whether they want to continue a relationship with me knowing I have that illness, and everything it entails. You can't pass on BP...but you can pass on STDs. Why can't people with STDs show the same respect?
It's this undertone of secrecy on these health issues between partners that really freaks me out. It's this idea that marriage somehow makes you immune to disease. It doesn't. I read awhile ago that women are more likely to get AIDS from their husbands than any other way.
I will fully disclose I'm a hardcore germaphobe though so any talk of this makes my skin crawl.
11/19/09
Also, the same thing happens with HSV-1 because kids are always putting things in their mouths and sharing those things with eachother.
there are also several other viruses which infect us early in life (my scientist boyfriend would know the actual names) but because they don't cause a lot of physiological "hullaballoo", are never really addressed.
I have genital herpes, for nearly 6 years now, and i've only had two outbreaks (visible) so I consider it highly manageable and not disruptive of my life.
That said, I do feel for those who have them frequently and have ones which are painful, I think I would be a lot more angry if that were the case with me - but, again, herpes is manageable with proper diet, supplementation and stress reduction practices. I think too many are too reliant on drugs like Famvir, Valtrex and Zovrax.
Living with it requires a lifestyle change to be more healthy and people are often not prepared to do that.
*steps off soapbox - sorry *
11/19/09
This means that one could contract it in one's early 20's, be unawares because they never took STD tests and then be giving it to partners when the "condoms come off" monogamy begins.
ALWAYS GET TESTED WHEN STARTING A NEW RELATIONSHIP.
It is the only true way to know what you have rather than wait for the disease to reveal itself.
11/19/09
#tips
11/19/09
11/19/09
I separate the disease from the person.
But that doesn't stop the disease from grossing me out, the same way the flem I was coughing up last week from my cold grossed me out.
The same why hummus, paracute pants, and sand in my bathing suit makes me go yuk. But do I think people who wear paracute pants are bad people? No.
Well maybe if they are metallic.
I just think this lackadaisy attitude towards safe sex is worrying to me. I'm 26. I can't remember a time growing up that people DIDN'T think using a condom was a good idea. Maybe growing up in the 90s when the AIDS scare was still fresh in our memories was different than now.
But I'm seeing this more and more in attitudes towards sex practices.
Whoever said getting fully tested before you start each relationship is a great idea and one I practice.
#tips
11/19/09
sucks
#tips
11/19/09
so where does that leave us with STD testing? does one need to specifically request an HSV test or ???
#tips
11/20/09
I'm not saying people shouldn't be careful, but we're talking about something little kids get from playing recorders at school and sharing water bottles. I'm not sure how much one can do to protect oneself from it completely, and I'm not sure it's worth a lot of angst about it.
Edit: reading farther down the thread, I realize that people were focusing mostly on those who already know they're infected and don't take precautions. I agree that that's definitely not cool, for the reasons mentioned below. I was thinking more about someone who wasn't infected, and how much time/mental energy they should expend worrying about it.
11/20/09
#tips
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
But that screengrab did just give me my first belly laugh of the day, so good karma for you.
"using Clitter may result in Sparklebabies"
aaand the laughter begins again.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
Much more nuanced than 'So Whatevs'.
And where's this pro-unprotected sex stance you claim? I'm truly curious what you're talking about.
11/19/09
[jezebel.com]
[jezebel.com]
11/19/09
However, I hold by my point, which I think the herpes article by Tracie makes itself.
And on the Moe post, I'm seeing this as one woman's satirical post on having unprotected sex, herself, with dorks. (heh.) Every article/bit about sex is not a statement by Jezebel as a whole on what it thinks about it and how it believes it's readers should think. Moe seemed to love sex-shocking, and obviously successfully.
11/19/09
There was a survey that doesn't show now for some reason, but I believe it was close to half or more readers thought it was ok not to disclose to their partner the fact that they have STDs. Disturbing to say the least.
11/19/09
I can't quite say "we have to agree to disagree", because I don't "disagree", per se.
But reading the comments to your listed article, all the debate about the issue is right there.
So maybe "We probably disagree on these points, even if just in nuanced ways" is best?
11/19/09
in said post, tracie thought her decision to not tell her bf at the time about her condition was ok. many people who took the survey she put forth agreed. i disagree with that theory.
just because one is afraid of being slut-shamed by a partner does not give them the right to withhold such information.
11/19/09
11/19/09
No no, and I see that, and I don't actually disagree with that, per se, I just think it's a longer discussion.
But! That discussion, judging by the comments on the post, has been had many times!
11/19/09
Hot damn that sounds horrible. If I ever go back on the market, I'll be on Team Abstinence until Trojan develops a sex HAZMAT suit.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
Alternatively, Chuck's a mom and pop; herpes is a cooperation. Herpes is a press conference; Chuck's a conversation.
11/19/09
11/19/09
That and the fact that nobody wants to talk about it.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09