Gay star quits porn movies over STD fear

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 4:44 AM GMT
    Gay actor refuses to work bareback in an industry where 50/60% are HIV+.
    Read his letter explaining his reasons here:

    http://str8upgayporn.com/twink-performer-tyler-morgan-quits-gay-porn-over-std-fears-i-will-not-work-with-poz-models/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 5:58 AM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle saidWho honestly cares?


    Well I'm not surprised you of all people don't care about others taking precautions not to get infected with HIV.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 6:05 AM GMT
    Love the comments in the article:

    "Wow actually someone with a brain in gay porn...good for you"

    "Finally a STAR with some sense."

    "Good for him. Bareback should be reserved for committed, monogamous relationships."

    I also like the part the guy says:

    "Yes I know there are plenty of precautions and medications out there that are preventative to everything Im talking about but, call me old-fashioned, I don't trust any medication that hasn't been FDA approved or has the research to show the long-term effects of the drugs/virus you're exposing too."

    So apparently I'm not the only one sceptical about taking new strong meds that are marketed as magical. Nothing against people who use them though, but I prefer to have my body free of drugs. I understand all the people who use them and it's certainly better to do it than do nothing at all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 6:10 AM GMT
    This is no surprise and the real extent of peoples considered reation to the new expectations of Gay Porn which is the source of the obsession with BB. Condoms on a cock doesnt make porn boring, poor chemistry between the guys and using the same old tired scenarios. Good that this guy took a stand but he will need many more ally's to make a real difference
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 6:25 AM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle said
    David666k said
    MuchMoreThanMuscle saidWho honestly cares?


    Well I'm not surprised you of all people don't care about others taking precautions not to get infected with HIV.


    Unlike you, I really don't make porn a part of my life. You're making a big deal about one porn model who chose not to do bareback porn. I don't see how you would be happy. He'll just be one less person for you to see in action on all the gay porn sites you spend all your free time on.


    Dude just because you jerk off to the fantasy of me watching porn doesnt make it true. I watch porn maybe once a week and sometimes I don't even do it alone, it's not even a secret thing.

    This guy here made a desision to improve his life and stay way from HIV, but of course you don't care about that. Misery loves company.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 7:46 AM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle saidActually, you've grossly misquoted the article. In the actual title of the waste of space link you provided it clearly states, "I will not work with poz models." That's not the same thing as refusing to bareback. Leave it to you to grossly misinterpret the facts. If that nasty looking twink could be assured that his fellow porn stars were HIV- he would more than likely bareback them. He just doesn't want to "work with poz models." There you go again with your poor comprehension skills.

    There you go again twisting words. The guy clearly said he quit because they wouldn't allow him to wear condoms, which he wore to protect himself against his porn star fellows of unknown status.

    Of course in a perfect world if we somehow knew that someone was in fact STD free we would bareback with them, BUT there is no way of knowing such a thing during hook ups or porn sessions. So we must protect ourselves against STDs. Will you EVER get this? icon_lol.gif That's the reason the guy wore condoms in the first place. And since they wont allow him to wear them anymore and he doesnt want to ingest strong drugs he just quit the business.

    Not surprised you of all people don't grasp such a basic concept about health.

    Also notice the disgust which you refer to this guy just because he naturally refused to bareback with poz men with no condoms. You're so transparent.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 5:48 PM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle said
    David666k said
    MuchMoreThanMuscle saidActually, you've grossly misquoted the article. In the actual title of the waste of space link you provided it clearly states, "I will not work with poz models." That's not the same thing as refusing to bareback. Leave it to you to grossly misinterpret the facts. If that nasty looking twink could be assured that his fellow porn stars were HIV- he would more than likely bareback them. He just doesn't want to "work with poz models." There you go again with your poor comprehension skills.

    There you go again twisting words. The guy clearly said he quit because they wouldn't allow him to wear condoms, which he wore to protect himself against his porn star fellows of unknown status.

    Of course in a perfect world if we somehow knew that someone was in fact STD free we would bareback with them, BUT there is no way of knowing such a thing during hook ups or porn sessions. So we must protect ourselves against STDs. Will you EVER get this? icon_lol.gif That's the reason the guy wore condoms in the first place. And since they wont allow him to wear them anymore and he doesnt want to ingest strong drugs he just quit the business.

    Not surprised you of all people don't grasp such a basic concept about health.

    Also notice the disgust which you refer to this guy just because he naturally refused to bareback with poz men with no condoms. You're so transparent.


    It took you over an hour to come back with this weak ass response? Dang, it's just ludicrous how you grossly misinterpret an online article that is barely a paragraph long. News flash for you, troglodyte! This twink can find studios to do porn that support the use of condoms. Believe it or not, even though you spend all your time enjoying bareback porn on the internet, it is possible for a model to work with a studio that does, in fact, promote the use of condoms. Not all porn companies require that their models bareback. If you didn't obsess over all those bareback stealth breeding porn sites and if you got your head out of your crusty ass you'd see that his reasons for leaving the industry, along with your manipulation of the facts, are utter rubbish.

    And lastly, I'm not disgusted by his decision not to bareback. I'm disgusted by your weak attempt to manipulate an uninteresting story about some twink that I don't even find remotely attractive. What a powerful message, Gayvita666! Such an important message from a porn model sitting naked with his ass up and exposed saying, "No to bareback sex!", while surrounded by pictures of at least three pairs of men enjoying gay "bareback" sex all around him on the very same page. Not to mention, your severe lack of comprehension skills are really starting to grate on my nerves.


    ^ All you said reeks of disgust and disapproval towards someone that should be encouraged for taking actions on protecting himself.
    You don't even realize how transparent and obvious you are. Everyone can see that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 9:56 PM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle said
    David666k said
    ^ All you said reeks of disgust and disapproval towards someone that should be encouraged for taking actions on protecting himself.
    You don't even realize how transparent and obvious you are. Everyone can see that.


    No, dingbat. What everyone can see is how you were obviously perusing the gay bareback porn sites (your typical internet habits) and came across some small article about a porn twink who doesn't want to bareback. Now, out of guilt you try create this weak thread to make you appear as if you care about HIV and the gay community. But why don't you care when you're watching all the gay bareback porn on the internet during your usual daily habits? There's a reason why you, a troglodyte from the countryside of Peru, knows all the bareback lingo associated with gay men and sex without condoms. Such as stealth breeding, "bug chaser", "gift giver", etc. You're disgusting.

    Everyone here can see you are so full of shit.


    You're out of arguments I see icon_lol.gif

    It's you and Timmm55 people call out for having an obvious agenda, not me. No matter how many stupid random things you say trying to insult me, you are what you are and people can see it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 27, 2015 10:40 PM GMT
    David how much time do spend on these porn sites?

    The information is not science based LOL. If this is your anecdotal 'evidence' I see your mental problem and the association of porn.

    The stupid twink doesn't know that PrEP is approved by the FDA? It's the only thing approved to prevent HIV. There are years and decades of data to show long term affects.

    "I feel I need to make an announcement"? For all his stupid fans I assume, like you. Self aggrandizing "star" indeed. Do people really follow him?

    Doesn't he understand the likelihood of getting HIV in porn with someone who HAS previously tested Negative is actually greater? They can be infected now and not show it on tests while in the window. It's no secret most gay porn actors are either POZ/UVL or are on PrEP. If they are either or both (POZ/UVL or are on PrEP) the chance of HIV infection are ZERO. And the porn industry does self-regulate that they are verified UVL or on PrEP.

    Not so easy to prove truly NEG.

    If the conversation is just about other STDs I wouldn't disagree. That's always been an issue for porn since day 1. PrEP and ART only prevent HIV.

    From another Pron actor:
    "The reality is, we have been trained for over two decades to believe that condoms are the single source for safer sex. The fact is, that’s old school thinking. There are many, many options when it comes to safer-sex. PrEP sex is safer sex!"


    http://blog.treasureislandmedia.com/2014/09/mrpamoptimisticaboutuseofprep/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 3:01 AM GMT
    I wouldn't be listening to these guys too much. I notice there is a pattern in these pro Prep articles being that people on not so great incomes being on the medication, well people do the math. Promotion=CHEAP MEDICATION. These guys send a poor message and its a pity coz Prep could be all it is meant to be but the BB warriors have unfortunately hijacked the agenda and we may all pay the price in the longer term

    Here is a transcript on what I posted as a direct response to thier Anacdotal promotion

    David on August 27, 2015 @ 7:53 pm

    I am very pleased that Prep is an available option for Men who engage in high risk sex however I am very concerned about the message that is being conveyed along with it about appropriate use and the truth of how the porn industry sets the trends in what behaviour is percieved as ‘normal’ gay male sexual expression. I accept that a percentage of men are engaging in bareback sex now and always have been and the proof is in the rates of STI tranmissions particularly HIV, which is now and has always been much higher for MWHSM. Prep has the potential of protecting sero discordent couples as well which is fantastic. The downside is the message been conveyed about condoms which is inaccurate and based on dubious studies primarily reliant on self reporting. There is also a myth being perveyed by Prep advocates that Prep doesn’t encourage an increase in high risk sexual behaviours and this is simply wrong and nothing more than propaganda. The efficacy of condoms used properly and consistantly as Prep is at least as protective and often more protective. What is to be gained by running down condoms as a protection against almost all STI’s while promoting Prep without addressing Prep’s risks which exist even for those who adhere to its prescribed proper use regime. The consequences of this will be felt for at least a generation if this message of ‘Prep=Good’, ‘condoms=bad, old fashioned, ineffective’. I can site any number of credible studies proving the Prep is a poor substitute for Condom protection but that doesn’t help anyone as it is potentially a great partner in the fight to improve the health of Gay Men. Stop runnning down Condom use as a sensible protection method for the majority of men, accept that bareback sex is still potentially trecherours as anyone reading your article would believe you are stating that BB is completely safe just as long as you are making Gillead rich and taking Prep.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 3:06 AM GMT
    [quote][cite]MuchMoreThanMuscle said[/cite]
    David666k said

    It's you and Timmm55 people call out for having an obvious agenda, not me. No matter how many stupid random things you say trying to insult me, you are what you are and people can see it.


    Why would I have an agenda? Subsidised medication may make you a promoter. Your message is akin to genacide buddy
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 3:39 AM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 saidI wouldn't be listening to these guys too much. I notice there is a pattern in these pro Prep articles being that people on not so great incomes being on the medication, well people do the math. Promotion=CHEAP MEDICATION. These guys send a poor message and its a pity coz Prep could be all it is meant to be but the BB warriors have unfortunately hijacked the agenda and we may all pay the price in the longer term

    Here is a transcript on what I posted as a direct response to thier Anacdotal promotion

    David on August 27, 2015 @ 7:53 pm

    I am very pleased that Prep is an available option for Men who engage in high risk sex however I am very concerned about the message that is being conveyed along with it about appropriate use and the truth of how the porn industry sets the trends in what behaviour is percieved as ‘normal’ gay male sexual expression. I accept that a percentage of men are engaging in bareback sex now and always have been and the proof is in the rates of STI tranmissions particularly HIV, which is now and has always been much higher for MWHSM. Prep has the potential of protecting sero discordent couples as well which is fantastic. The downside is the message been conveyed about condoms which is inaccurate and based on dubious studies primarily reliant on self reporting. There is also a myth being perveyed by Prep advocates that Prep doesn’t encourage an increase in high risk sexual behaviours and this is simply wrong and nothing more than propaganda. The efficacy of condoms used properly and consistantly as Prep is at least as protective and often more protective. What is to be gained by running down condoms as a protection against almost all STI’s while promoting Prep without addressing Prep’s risks which exist even for those who adhere to its prescribed proper use regime. The consequences of this will be felt for at least a generation if this message of ‘Prep=Good’, ‘condoms=bad, old fashioned, ineffective’. I can site any number of credible studies proving the Prep is a poor substitute for Condom protection but that doesn’t help anyone as it is potentially a great partner in the fight to improve the health of Gay Men. Stop runnning down Condom use as a sensible protection method for the majority of men, accept that bareback sex is still potentially trecherours as anyone reading your article would believe you are stating that BB is completely safe just as long as you are making Gillead rich and taking Prep.

    +1
    Lets not forget the many STDs you might get barebacking too.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 5:56 AM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle saidAnd for the one hundredth time. I've made it clear that when I seek out casual sex partners that I sero-sort and play with other HIV+ men. It's not possible for me to have some type of seedy agenda as SyndneySlop and Gayvita have blatantly lied and accused me of.

    My partner is on prEP because he is HIV- but he sought me out from the beginning and he knew my status from my profile before we ever met. He has dated other people with HIV and wasn't using prEP but I asked him to go on it for his own protection and to remain HIV-.

    I can easily understand why these two clowns are always assuming the worst when someone challenges their parochial views on safe sex. Since they're both sex-obsessed themselves and have unhealthy, tawdry views on the topic it comes as no surprise they they try and hurl their own unhealthy excrement unto people like me.

    It's no secret that SydneySlob frequents his local bathhouse for anonymous sex with strangers on a weekly, if not more frequent, basis. And, of course, we have Gayvita666 who tirelessly obsesses and fantasizes about bareback stealth breeding what with all the gay porn sites he visits behind his girlfriend's back. Honestly, I'm sick and tired of it all.

    So many words loaded with excuses and desperate insults, getting nervous? You're transparent.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 6:12 AM GMT
    ^ I see you're out of arguments, as usual.

    You're a bore, go write essays somewhere else, go find someone who believes you. Good night.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 28, 2015 4:35 PM GMT
    Sydneyrugbyjock73 saidI wouldn't be listening to these guys too much. I notice there is a pattern in these pro Prep articles being that people on not so great incomes being on the medication, well people do the math. Promotion=CHEAP MEDICATION. These guys send a poor message and its a pity coz Prep could be all it is meant to be but the BB warriors have unfortunately hijacked the agenda and we may all pay the price in the longer term

    Here is a transcript on what I posted as a direct response to thier Anacdotal promotion

    David on August 27, 2015 @ 7:53 pm

    I am very pleased that Prep is an available option for Men who engage in high risk sex (that is what it is intended for) however I am very concerned about the message that is being conveyed along with it about appropriate use and the truth of how the porn industry sets the trends in what behaviour is percieved as ‘normal’ gay male sexual expression. (Porn has never been a 'standard' by which anyone should live by) I accept that a percentage of men are engaging in bareback sex now and always have been and the proof is in the rates of STI tranmissions particularly HIV, which is now and has always been much higher for MWHSM. Prep has the potential of protecting sero discordent couples as well which is fantastic. (Perfect! If you get that we don't have an argument) The downside is the message been conveyed about condoms which is inaccurate and based on dubious studies primarily reliant on self reporting. (Virtually every condom study is based on self-reporting. They can not test for drugs in your system.) There is also a myth being perveyed by Prep advocates that Prep doesn’t encourage an increase in high risk sexual behaviours and this is simply wrong and nothing more than propaganda. (THAT is propaganda. Reality: But risk compensation after PrEP implementation has been examined in several trials and to date has not been associated with increased sexual risk behavior or sexually transmitted infections in the majority of these studies [(3–5, 7, 31–34)]. In the iPrEx trial, in which subjects receive blinded medication or placebo, there was no change in reported sexual practices from baseline through followup and no difference in overall syphilis incidence in the perceived treatment group [(34)]. Qualitative findings from the iPrEx open-label extension parallel these results, with participants reporting no significant changes in their sexual practices [(35)].)
    http://www.thebody.com/content/75704/are-condoms-over-research-and-reality-for-gay-men.html?getPage=3

    The efficacy of condoms used properly and consistantly as Prep is at least as protective and often more protective. (They are both good, and used together they are nearly fool proof.) What is to be gained by running down condoms as a protection against almost all STI’s (I don't) while promoting Prep without addressing Prep’s risks which exist even for those who adhere to its prescribed proper use regime. (YOU inserted a PrEP myth there.) The consequences of this will be felt for at least a generation if this message of ‘Prep=Good’, ‘condoms=bad, old fashioned, ineffective’. (No, it's PrEP=Good, Condoms=good, ART=Good, ANY risk reduction is GOOOOOOD!) I can site any number of credible studies proving the Prep is a poor substitute for Condom protection (site them so I can see them) but that doesn’t help anyone as it is potentially a great partner in the fight to improve the health of Gay Men. (WOW WE AGREE!!!!) Stop runnning down Condom use as a sensible protection method for the majority of men, ( I don't. as I've posted ACON several times it's #1 on the list) accept that bareback sex is still potentially trecherours as anyone reading your article would believe you are stating that BB is completely safe (an absurd statement) just as long as you are making Gillead rich and taking Prep. (That's where you completely fall on your face. YOU'RE the one down playing PrEP as a prevention, it's a huge game changer. You mistakenly think I am pro-pharmaceutical and BIG business. I am not. Personally, I think it should be nationalized, at least the HIV medications. Cost should be driven down. There is nothing wrong with the science....but greed is self-evident in the pharmaceutical business)



    Here is an excellent PRO-condom article/study.

    So, are condoms over? No. The availability of new prevention options does not require us to abandon a tool that has been proven effective for decades. Let's move forward in the search for new prevention options without bashing the ones we have -- or those who promote them.


    http://www.thebody.com/content/75704/are-condoms-over-research-and-reality-for-gay-men.html?getPage=3


    As a reminder for everything my 'agenda' is read ACON:


    There are now at least five strategies that reasonably constitute‘safe sex’, provided that certain parameters are met.
    They are:
    1.The use of Condoms during casual encounters between men of unknown or discordant serostatus.
    2.HIV negative men taking effective pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP).
    3.Men living with HIV who only have sex without condoms when they have a sustained undetectable viral load (UVL) and in the absence of sexually transmissible infections (STIs).
    4.Effective use of serosorting between HIV positive men.
    5.Effective negotiated safety agreements.

    http://www.acon.org.au/sites/default/files/What-is-Safe-Sex-Position-2014.pdf

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2015 3:13 AM GMT
    David666k saidGay actor refuses to work bareback in an industry where 50/60% are HIV+.
    Read his letter explaining his reasons here:

    http://str8upgayporn.com/twink-performer-tyler-morgan-quits-gay-porn-over-std-fears-i-will-not-work-with-poz-models/
    I work in one of the top three most dangerous jobs in aviation...aerial advertising, ie. banner towing. In fact, a fellow banner tower was just killed last week while doing his job (the stereotypical 'crash and burn' thing - while screaming for help). Many of my friends and coworkers in the business have been injured or dies in crashes related to this job.

    Why do I still do it? Because it's fun! But I have occasionally considered changing careers, or at least taking a safer flying gig.

    That said, I don't blame Tyler for wanting out of a high risk career. Yeah it's fun to live on the edge, but sometimes it really can get to you mentally.