Study: Nearly Half of MSM bareback thru online hook up apps

[RaKroma]

A new survey focused on gay and bisexual men who use apps such as Grindr, Scruff and Manhunt to meet sexual partners found that nearly half had engaged in unprotected sex.

Conducted by New York's Community Healthcare Network (CHN), "Zero Feet Away: Perpective on HIV/AIDS and Unprotected Sex in Men Who Have Sex With Men Utilizing Location-based Mobile Apps" found that although 80 percent of respondents said they were knowledgable in how the HIV virus was transmitted, 46.4 percent admitted to having bareback sex always, often or sometimes. Complete Article in link http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...ref=gay-voices

quoting a comment left there " Do not kid yourself. These men know about HIV. The fact is that HIV is no longer a deadly disease. If you get infected there are one pill one a day regimens out there that enable you to live a normal life. The new drug Complera is a one pill once a day combo pill with Truvada in it. Mostly these drugs have few or no side effects. Face it people the AIDs crisis has passed here in the US. Alot of gay men have gone back to the pre 1980 sex habits because HIV is not a real threat anymore. If you are uninsured the government has the ADAP program that pays for your medications. "

I wonder if people really do have this attitude that HIV is not deadly and if I get it, the government will pay for my expensive pills that have no side effects?

[freefall]

The problem is people never look past that it's a disease and it's manageable and that's all. Nothing beyond that.
They haven't never seen how HIV/AIDS can change someone's health - and so does the medications (still a long way to go for HIV medications with little side effects).
And I don't think they know that the medication only extends their life, not cure the disease, and eventually they will succumb to the disease. And that the regiment has to be taken every single day until the day they die - and I don't think they will comply once they are diagnosed with HIV.
Also people who lives this way may actually get it may never tell the other as they're either dead in a few days after diagnosed due to severe infections on full-blown AIDS or keep the status a secret until they die due to severe infections on full-blown AIDS.

[weinerslav]

I feel a bit appalled by the comment the user left but probably I shouldn't... A lot of guys took the risk before the said pill existed, so why not now? It seems dumb, if you can avoid something like that, why not avoid it? Because a pill a day will keep the doctor away? I wouldn't take the risk...

[maxpowr9]

You won't get much talk about HIV here. I am sure there are a few members here [statistically speaking] with the disease that would never talk about their positive status.

[G-Lexington]

Most HIV-topic threads here either don't go very far, or they get the responses you expect to get. A lot of "I always use condoms" and "I'm in a monogamous relationship". We get a few "I bareback because it's really hot" people weighing in, but not many. Either the barebackers don't post in the threads (much), or they talk the talk but don't walk the walk.

Lex

[Harke the Boeotarch]

^ I bareback from time to time and have discussed it here at least once.

[loveguys72]

I'm just old enough to remember when HIV came on the scene, and it scared the crap outta me growing up gay in the mid to late 1980s, which is probably why I waited so long to first have sex. Always been careful since. Treatment for sure is way better than it was 25 years ago, but I'd really rather not, thanks.

I guess there are guys who are willing to take the calculated risk, and I wish them luck with that. I've never been attracted to Russian Roulette myself.

[BFizzle]

Hoes hooking up on grindr don't use condoms? Color me shocked.

[bankside]

quoting a comment left there " Do not kid yourself. These men know about HIV. The fact is that HIV is no longer a deadly disease. If you get infected there are one pill one a day regimens out there that enable you to live a normal life. The new drug Complera is a one pill once a day combo pill with Truvada in it. Mostly these drugs have few or no side effects. Face it people the AIDs crisis has passed here in the US. Alot of gay men have gone back to the pre 1980 sex habits because HIV is not a real threat anymore. If you are uninsured the government has the ADAP program that pays for your medications. "

I wonder if people really do have this attitude that HIV is not deadly and if I get it, the government will pay for my expensive pills that have no side effects?

If "undetectable" really meant anything then shouldn't infection rates be plummeting?

[freefall]

Most HIV-topic threads here either don't go very far, or they get the responses you expect to get. A lot of "I always use condoms" and "I'm in a monogamous relationship". We get a few "I bareback because it's really hot" people weighing in, but not many. Either the barebackers don't post in the threads (much), or they talk the talk but don't walk the walk.

Or they had spoken out loud regularly but was labelled as trolls and then banished outside JUB paradise. Like that barebackdude-numbersomething or similar.

[blackbeltninja]

I've never liked the "HIV is not a death sentence anymore" message which prevails these days. Yes, it isn't. But the ads and campaigns don't stress that it will still make your life difficult and you should avoid it at all costs.

I understand the idea - at least here- was to destigmatise those who are living with the virus. But in all the positivity which prevailed, the core details seem to be largely overlooked at present.

-d-

[bankside]

I've never liked the "HIV is not a death sentence anymore" message which prevails these days. Yes, it isn't. But the ads and campaigns don't stress that it will still make your life difficult and you should avoid it at all costs.

I understand the idea - at least here- was to destigmatise those who are living with the virus. But in all the positivity which prevailed, the core details seem to be largely overlooked at present.

-d-

Well when Reagan was portraying the role of President, the US media was abuzz with talk of quarantining the gays who had the gay disease. Based on medical considerations, but probably mostly on anti-gay superstition.

However I wonder if quarantine would have worked! It seemed to work for tuberculosis, typhoid and smallpox…. Of course those measures wouldn't be necessary if all people with HIV realised it was their duty to not pass it on to someone else, no matter how reckless that guy is with his own health. Which is why I can't agree with you, Huntneo, on this point:

Totally not surprised.

My take on it is that they're adults...they can do what they want to with their body (and their lives, for that matter).

[Rolyo85]

I'm inclined to believe that study. I have had a few guys ask me if I was negative, and when I said yes, said they were too and offered to bareback. And my first thought is always "if you're offering me, after knowing me all of five minutes and taking my word for granted, how many other people have been there that you just took at their word?"

[LaughOutLoud]

How tragically depressing.

[weinerslav]

This topic brought me this to memory, but I don't know if it is really more safe or not... And somehow, doesn't this make it safe only for one side?





Well, I confess, I bareback, but I'm in a long term relationship, and probably I trust more in him than in myself lol. Had the chance to do it before but I never dared to take the risk...

[sixthson]

Maybe for the same reason people feel there is little or no risk to oral sex. Or why tops feel ok with bareback because they believe they are less at risk than the bottom.
It used to be a common reminder that you are having sex not only with your sex partner but every partner they have ever had, too. This seems to be long ignored.
When you are meeting guys for sex that you met on a hook up site, you are playing Russian roulette with your life and health.

[Rolyo85]

The risk IS vastly smaller for the top. That's a medical fact. Doesn't change the fact that there is real risk all the same of course.

[FlimFlam]

Sad but honestly? Not shocking at all. I wouldn't be surprised if the number is actually higher.

Many bareback in the heat of the moment but would deny it up and down if approached about it.

My problem is with those people who bareback and don't get tested, putting future partners at unnecessary risk. If you're going to do something as dangerous as unprotected sex, at least get tested regularly so that your status is as up to date as possible.

[youfiad]

So instead of buying a cheap condom, lets risk getting AIDs then use the government to fork out hundreds of thousands of dollars to treat your mistake. Bright. Super bright.

[Just_Believe18]

This is true, although frighteningly higher.

When I travel outside my city of residence, I sometimes play a game with boys on Grindr and other apps/sites. I see how far I can push them to hook up with me and convince them to bareback. This isn't just sexting and fantasizing. I actually get them to agree that this is how we're going to meet up, and this is the kind of bareback sex we're going to have. They get so into it, I often have to make up extensive excuses to get them to back off because they're so eager.

The result?

On one trip, I got 13 to say yes to barebacking, 5 no. I usually try to push them to let me top them bare (more risk for them) before conceding to saying they can top me bareback (less risk for them). Most of them do not even ask if I am negative or when the last time I was tested. The age range is between 18-35 that I target, and of all racial minority types. Usually the 18-19 year olds and guys in their thirties were more easily receptive to wanting to bareback with me.

I usually get a super majority of 65-75% who say yes to barebacking for a hook-up. It's too easy, actually. If I was actually positive and actually going through with these meet-ups, It would be very easy for me to infect a dozen guys within a matter of a week. It's that tragic.

What keeps it from becoming an epidemic again is that I think most guys are shy about their inhibitions. Fortunately, there is a common assumption of having condoms handy, and no one will ever really reject a hook-up for being safe. However, from what I've experienced in my interactions, all you need to do is.. ask.

[JustMe5]

Is it really surprising to anyone? I think a lot of men who use those gay-hookup-apps are already hiv-positive and perhaps have been so for years. I would bet that they don't care who they infect during sex. A couple of years ago I read that gay men under age 25 are at the highest risk of contracting hiv. That is truly sad. You would think that by now (the second decade of the 21st century) hiv would've been a thing of the past.

It's true that it's each person's responsibility to take certain precautions when having sex, but at the same time the fact that there are new hiv-infection cases every year among gays goes to show that some hiv-positive men simply don't give a damn if they pass the virus onto others.

[Rolyo85]

Is it really surprising to anyone? I think a lot of men who use those gay-hookup-apps are already hiv-positive and perhaps have been so for years. I would bet that they don't care who they infect during sex. A couple of years ago I read that gay men under age 25 are at the highest risk of contracting hiv. That is truly sad. You would think that by now (the second decade of the 21st century) hiv would've been a thing of the past.

It's true that it's each person's responsibility to take certain precautions when having sex, but at the same time the fact that there are new hiv-infection cases every year among gays goes to show that some hiv-positive men simply don't give a damn if they pass the virus onto others.

This is a pretty bigoted view to hold, frankly. You may think a "lot" of men who use hook up apps are already hiv-positive, and though that might be true, the implication that it's somehow the norm, is clear in your post, and also pretty gross. Also, most guys who are aware of their HIV+ status, take all necessary precautions to not infect anyone, even if they can sometimes not be forthright with their status. That some decide they can bareback with other HIV+ guys is wrong, but mostly due to ignorance rather than uncaring.

In general, I fined the view that guys who use apps to hook up are some weird breed of disease-ridden whores who don't care who suffers as long as they get their rocks off, is seriously offensive.

[JustMe5]

Also, most guys who are aware of their HIV+ status, take all necessary precautions to not infect anyone, even if they can sometimes not be forthright with their status. That some decide they can bareback with other HIV+ guys is wrong, but mostly due to ignorance rather than uncaring.

In general, I fined the view that guys who use apps to hook up are some weird breed of disease-ridden whores who don't care who suffers as long as they get their rocks off, is seriously offensive.

Most? How can you possibly be sure of that? And you're reading into my post way too much. Considering that this thread about the fact that nearly half of men who use hookup-apps choose to bareback, then think about it: if that high a percentage of hookup-app users engage in bareback sex then what would be the reason behind it? Either they think they can't get infected with hiv and/or don't see hiv as a death sentence, or they already have the virus and thus feel that they have nothing to lose by barebacking.

[G-Lexington]

I think it's smart to assume that everybody you meet via a hook-up IS HIV+. Not because they all are, or most are, but because it's the best way to protect yourself.

Lex

[Rolyo85]

Most? How can you possibly be sure of that? And you're reading into my post way too much. Considering that this thread about the fact that nearly half of men who use hookup-apps choose to bareback, then think about it: if that high a percentage of hookup-app users engage in bareback sex then what would be the reason behind it? Either they think they can't get infected with hiv and/or don't see hiv as a death sentence, or they already have the virus and thus feel that they have nothing to lose by barebacking.

Exactly, and my experience - as someone who actually uses hook up apps - is that most just are clueless as to what the risks are, and too trusting that when a guy tells them he's neg, he actually KNOWS it for sure. Not because they (know that they) are infected and don't care who they infect. This is way too cynical.

- - - Updated - - -

I think it's smart to assume that everybody you meet via a hook-up IS HIV+. Not because they all are, or most are, but because it's the best way to protect yourself.

Lex

Well, I don't assume that because if I do, I can't get it up... But I assume they aren't necessarily aware enough to know for sure either way. For me it is simply how NSA sex is done - with condoms. If anyone has a problem with it - there's the door.

[Audio Tech]

I'm just old enough to remember when HIV came on the scene, and it scared the crap outta me growing up gay in the mid to late 1980s, which is probably why I waited so long to first have sex. Always been careful since. Treatment for sure is way better than it was 25 years ago, but I'd really rather not, thanks.

Me too. In fact, the sheer terror of catching Aids back then kept me firmly in the closet. I just kind of said to myself "Oh great.... there goes any chance I'll ever have of getting laid."

I just cannot understand why people are so unconcerned about their health. Sure, there is something primal and alluring about the idea of uninhibited sex with anyone, anytime.... but damn... Not for my LIFE.

Plus I HAVE seen many people actually wasting away horribly and dying from this. It scarred me for life.

[Nishin]

[...]
I just cannot understand why people are so unconcerned about their health. Sure, there is something primal and alluring about the idea of uninhibited sex with anyone, anytime.... but damn... Not for my LIFE.
[...]

Pushing things to the other extreme I just cannot understand why people are so concerned about their "life"... and yet don't hesitate to walk in streets near cars, eat processed food in which salt is killing them little by little, drink alcohol which is poisoning them little by little, fly planes, live in areas prone to earthquakes/typhoons etc etc...
If life is just only keeping one's heart beating but not experimenting/feeling things, what's the point even living?

[Audio Tech]

Pushing things to the other extreme I just cannot understand why people are so concerned about their "life"... and yet don't hesitate to walk in streets near cars, eat processed food in which salt is killing them little by little, drink alcohol which is poisoning them little by little, fly planes, live in areas prone to earthquakes/typhoons etc etc...
If life is just only keeping one's heart beating but not experimenting/feeling things, what's the point even living?

It's a very valid point.... but it's about mitigating risk. Experiencing life to the fullest, but don't be an idiot about it.

I can jump out of a plane with a parachute. I still experience life. It's highly unlikely I'll die. Yes, it COULD happen, but I took precautions.
I can let someone fuck my brains out with a condom. I still experience great pleasure. It's also highly unlikely I'll die later FROM that act. I mitigated my risk to exposure, but still enjoyed the act just as much.

I can jump out of a plane ONCE naked and experience the thrill of my (now ending) life. But damn, what a rush! What a shame I can't do it again.

I can let a room of guys fuck me bareback and enjoy it immensely KNOWING I can crawl away with HIV. But why would I WANT to do this when a little piece of latex could protect me and I get the same thrill? Yes, I know it's not a 100% guarantee, but the odds are very low. I also refuse to stop living. If it happens, it happens. But I don't INVITE it on purpose.

Sure, NOTHING is 100% percent. But I don't run across a street on a red light either. I wait for a green and MITIGATE my risk. I still cross the street.

We are all going to die. I just want it to be as late and as healthy as possible.

If you could avoid getting ebola, wouldn't you?

In the end, you can give HIV to someone. But you cannot drink, eat, or smoke someone else to death. Only yourself.

So yeah... I don't get it. It's so simple to at least TRY to play safe(er). Why is it such a big deal NOT to?

[G-Lexington]

I've never snowboarded by leaping out of a helicopter onto a 14K. I know someone who has, and not surprisingly, he says you "haven't lived" until you've tried it. And if so, I simply will never live. Even if the risks didn't concern me, I hate the cod, I hate the snow, I'm not athletic, I have lousy ankles, etc.

My first boyfriend was an "experiencer". Always trying new things. And I can admire that to some degree. But here's the kicker - he never seemed that happy. He seemed more like he was checking things off a long list than actually experiencing them. His Facebook page is a litany of "look where I went", "look what I did" and "look who I met" photos. Maybe e's really enjoying his life - I really can't tell. (I could never "read" him even when I was with him.) But he's hardly ever smiling in any of the photos. He's probably too busy thinking how to get from the Oscar red carpet to Kilimanjaro. I never can shake the feeling he's tabulating the "likes" on his photos as evidence that he's "living".

I had the night off last night. I ate cheese and crackers and fruit bars for dinner. I went to bed, put on some easy listening records from the '50s, read an old book, and futzed around on JUB. No "life" to speak of. It'd make for terrible reality TV. But I loved it. Those are all things I really enjoy doing. I certainly don't consider that night "wasted".

Lex

[Nishin]

It's a very valid point.... but it's about mitigating risk. Experiencing life to the fullest, but don't be an idiot about it.

I can jump out of a plane with a parachute. I still experience life. It's highly unlikely I'll die. Yes, it COULD happen, but I took precautions.
I can let someone fuck my brains out with a condom. I still experience great pleasure. It's also highly unlikely I'll die later FROM that act. I mitigated my risk to exposure, but still enjoyed the act just as much.

I can jump out of a plane ONCE naked and experience the thrill of my (now ending) life. But damn, what a rush! What a shame I can't do it again.

I can let a room of guys fuck me bareback and enjoy it immensely KNOWING I can crawl away with HIV. But why would I WANT to do this when a little piece of latex could protect me and I get the same thrill? Yes, I know it's not a 100% guarantee, but the odds are very low. I also refuse to stop living. If it happens, it happens. But I don't INVITE it on purpose.

Sure, NOTHING is 100% percent. But I don't run across a street on a red light either. I wait for a green and MITIGATE my risk. I still cross the street.

We are all going to die. I just want it to be as late and as healthy as possible.

If you could avoid getting ebola, wouldn't you?

In the end, you can give HIV to someone. But you cannot drink, eat, or smoke someone else to death. Only yourself.

So yeah... I don't get it. It's so simple to at least TRY to play safe(er). Why is it such a big deal NOT to?

Of course I was exagerating and taking my point to an extreme, just as I think it is extreme to refrain from any activity at all just because of the risks (real or fantasized) involved...

You are very right that no-one who is sound will not avoid getting ebola if they can...

I'm was trying to illustrate how people are inconsistent and irrational in discriminating what they consider reasonable risks to take or not. Benefits vs risks appreciation appear pathologically unbalanced when someone will refrain from all sexual activity by fear of catching something they have low risks to catch if they take minimum preventive steps to avoid it... I often read about guys who are late virgins or won't let themselves experience sex (noticeably) because of irrational fear and such attitude does annoy me and enticed my counter-argumentativ post above...

[Audio Tech]

Of course I was exagerating and taking my point to an extreme, just as I think it is extreme to refrain from any activity at all just because of the risks (real or fantasized) involved...

You are very right that no-one who is sound will not avoid getting ebola if they can...

I'm was trying to illustrate how people are inconsistent and irrational in discriminating what they consider reasonable risks to take or not. Benefits vs risks appreciation appear pathologically unbalanced when someone will refrain from all sexual activity by fear of catching something they have low risks to catch if they take minimum preventive steps to avoid it... I often read about guys who are late virgins or won't let themselves experience sex (noticeably) because of irrational fear and such attitude does annoy me and enticed my counter-argumentativ post above...

Yeah, I understand that.

It's still a strange... but I suppose there are a lot of fatalists in society that simply don't care what happens to them. Sometimes I feel the same way and just think to myself "Fuck it, how long do I really have.... I should just go and live my wildest desires while I can. I'll die anyway." "May as well enjoy the ride". I mean, I'm now at 49..... even if I got HIV, I'd still live longer than I'd really want to at this point. I have a hard time seeing myself at 70. And likely alone. So what do I have to loose?

But my rational mind tells me that I value my health, AND I am too well of to qualify for free Aids meds but not well enough to afford them. So.... Is all this worth NOT using at least some protection?

In the end I don't know. Maybe the younger generation just doesn't care about consequences or is just fatalistic. I do know that in my 20's I was truly convinced I wouldn't live to see 30, but I was STILL horrified by AIDS. I SAW these poor people, when no one had any idea what was happening. Yeah, it was wonderful being in my sexual prime right during the great AIDS outbreak. Put a real damper on me. Not only did I stay IN the closet, I curled up in a ball in the corner thinking that sex would be out of the question forever now. The difference back then (to me) was: Gay = Death sentence. I was THAT scared!

Of course now we know that you won't get AIDS just from shaking someone's hand....

Today the thinking is to just take another pill. Our political correctness has taken these images out of the media, so people forget just how awful this disease really IS.

Well, regardless.... no one is getting near MY ass without a condom. But I won't stop living.

The saddest thing is that we COULD have stopped this disease when it first started. But those measures are deemed too controversial, so let's just go on to infect the whole damn planet. The drug industry has nothing but to gain from it anyway, so who cares!

We, as a species, have a LOT to learn.

[FlimFlam]

Also, most guys who are aware of their HIV+ status, take all necessary precautions to not infect anyone, even if they can sometimes not be forthright with their status. That some decide they can bareback with other HIV+ guys is wrong, but mostly due to ignorance rather than uncaring.

LOL, how naive are you?

This is just false.

[FlimFlam]

^^^

Maybe not "all necessary" but I'm willing to bet most are careful. I think it's also true that many do not consider different people can have different HIV strains, some more virulent or responsive to treatment than others.

What are you basing it on?

There are definitely a lot out there (a few who I have known) who know they are HIV positive and have raw sex with other people while telling them they are negative.

[xbuzzerx]

What are you basing it on?

There are definitely a lot out there (a few who I have known) who know they are HIV positive and have raw sex with other people while telling them they are negative.

You need better friends. :/

[FlimFlam]

You need better friends. :/

You wouldn't know this about them by seeing them. Some of these people are executives, teachers, etc. Some great people, some not so great.

Anyway I've only had one friend that was like that. I've had a few other friends who were infected by those kind of people though. And I've had HIV pos friends who tell me their experiences and the experiences of other HIV pos people they know.

[Rolyo85]

Well, your anecdotal examples don't really trump my anecdotal examples, so...

[FlimFlam]

Well, your anecdotal examples don't really trump my anecdotal examples, so...

What anecdotal examples? Your assertion was made as if you have tons of personal experience with HIV positive people that use hookup apps.

I only responded b/c I think that's dangerous misinformation

[FlimFlam]

If they lie to people about their HIV status and fuck raw, they're not "great." They're pieces of shit.

Well yea, people who lie about their statuses are terrible but there are those that aren't asked and there are others who believe that if they are undetectable or at levels they believe make transmission unlikely, they don't see themselves as doing much wrong. Obviously I disagree and think it's still terrible whether you aren't asked or whatever case but what if they aren't asked about their status and have unprotected oral sex but protected anal sex. Is that better? I feel like then it's more grey area.. and then there are a whole new set of questions.

I think the point of this and the story is that guys when they are horny many times make decisions they know are wrong or risky. And as a community we probably have to figure something out about that.

[Rolyo85]

What anecdotal examples? Your assertion was made as if you have tons of personal experience with HIV positive people that use hookup apps.

I only responded b/c I think that's dangerous misinformation

I know a few, and they are all very responsible. You know a few and they aren't. Those are anecdotal examples. Neither proves anything, so neither is a counter-argument. We just have different experience, and in mine, guys who hook up while being HIV+, aren't irresponsible.

Also, not all guys who bareback have any disease, even though the risk is greater. Some actually are pretty smart about it.

[FlimFlam]

I know a few, and they are all very responsible. You know a few and they aren't. Those are anecdotal examples. Neither proves anything, so neither is a counter-argument. We just have different experience, and in mine, guys who hook up while being HIV+, aren't irresponsible.

Also, not all guys who bareback have any disease, even though the risk is greater. Some actually are pretty smart about it.

The difference is you're extrapolating your experience to make a blanket statement.

Either way, I don't want to get into an argument. I just want to say to anyone to be careful and just because someone says he is negative doesn't mean he is. There are a lot of people on adam, manhunt and grindr who are misrepresenting themselves.

Be safe, use a condom.

[bankside]

Are we worrying too much about anecdotes when we have the study itself that shows half of people on those apps are ridiculously irresponsible?

[Saybrooke]

People are so crazy! DX

It upsets me thoroughly!

[JayHawk]

There There.


Every time I read this I read "Main Stream Media" instead of "Male Sex Male"

Anyways durtee hoes be multiplyin'

[Rolyo85]

Are we worrying too much about anecdotes when we have the study itself that shows half of people on those apps are ridiculously irresponsible?

Actually, we have a study that shows half of people on these apps bareback. That doesn't mean they are necessarily irresponsible, let alone "ridiculously" so. Though I'm sure many of them are.

[Nishin]

There There.


Every time I read this I read "Main Stream Media" instead of "Male Sex Male"

Anyways durtee hoes be multiplyin'

I think it's Men who have sex with men

[Nishin]

[...]

I heard that hepatitis C is deadlier than HIV itself. One of my nurse friend told me.
You'll experience nasty horrible treatment until you wish you rather die..is that true?

[...]

Well HepC kills more USAmericans than HIV mostly because it is asymptomatic and people don't realize they have it...

[JayHawk]

I know I just havent used that MSM term since like AOL chat days

[bankside]

Actually, we have a study that shows half of people on these apps bareback. That doesn't mean they are necessarily irresponsible, let alone "ridiculously" so. Though I'm sure many of them are.

Barebacking with a stranger someone meets via a phone app is not ridiculously irresponsible?

What more would they have to do to be ridiculously irresponsible in your assessment?

[bankside]

I know I just havent used that MSM term since like AOL chat days

It is a term invented by epidemiologists to deal with all the men who say "Yeah I like to get fucked by guys every weekend, but I'm not gay, I'm straight." Rather than argue with them or try to break through their delusions, they just went with MSM.

[Nishin]

It is a term invented by epidemiologists to deal with all the men who say "Yeah I like to get fucked by guys every weekend, but I'm not gay, I'm straight." Rather than argue with them or try to break through their delusions, they just went with MSM.

This is partly incorrect, or at least reductive... there is obviously that aspect to consider but it is not only that.
MSM means means just what it stands for... Bisexual mens who have an active sexual life with men are MSM, not gay.
In my understanding and use of the acronym, you will find gay virgins, but MSM need to have an active sexual life to get the label.

I am gay because I am exclusively attracted to bed, but I will need to actually take it to the bedroom to become MSM.