WTF is PrEP Ad...WTF?

Hmm I don't get it.

Is saying "I'm on PrEP" the new way of saying "Let's fuck w/o a condom"?

 

I'm terrified of sexual diseases. I know guys that say that being on the pill makes them be as just like undetectable or something so he tells people he's negative.

Not to sound mean & I know it takes two to tango but I don't like that...Idk what to make of these ads....its like it's giving clearance to have raw sex as if it was a birth control pill...or something..

 

Both ads rub me the wrong way. Neither one seems to be communicating anything about prevention. They actually strikes me more as ads promoting easy sex.

 

Yeah, I don't think these ads are the way to 'reach' people. The ad is ironic because if you don't know what prep is already, you would be saying "WTF is prep?" as a viewer. If anything, they need to make the ads like the ones what play during the evening news for Xalrelto and Boniva. Explain what it is.

 

I think they had good intentions, but went about it the wrong way. The idea isn't necessarily to encourage people to have unprotected sex. It just acknowledges the fact that people are going to have unprotected sex regardless. So if you are, you may as well take PrEP to reduce your chances of infection. Individuals who have unprotected sex are one of PrEP's primary target populations to help control HIV from a wide public health perspective, so I get it. It just looks weird for people who always use condoms.

 

I agree. The first ad (Lamar and Mario) makes no sense. When the guy says I am on PrP, what is he saying? Is it a warning? Is he soliciting information from his would-be hook-up: are you on PrP? And if the answer is no, then where does this go? Does the guy get up and walk off, as opposed perhaps to just getting up and getting off? It would be really interesting to see exactly how many people move on to find out what PrP is.

 

This is why I'm a Sider.
​

 

I don't know about that. It did look like he grabbed 2 packs of condems when he grabbed his keys.
..However, it isn't a condem ad. As mentioned by others, it is focused on folks having risky protected sex. Those who use condems will continue to use them.

Question: If you are married, do you think you need to use condems or PrEP of both of you are HIV-?

 

Ideally, we would trust one another and have no need for condoms. Really, we'd be at that point long before marriage. But people have gotten positive from their "monogamous" partners, so you never know.

 

I hear you.. but should there be a double standard between straight folks and gay folks? I think not. We need to Monogamous is monogamous, regardless. Trust is trust... honesty is honesty.

 

With regard to Reason #32, would you (@Tyroc ) feel that same way in a hetrosexual relationship? Would you always use condems? In a trusting, monogamous relationship, what's the difference?

 

I'd be and have been just as guilty of the "oh, baby we in love in now so it's ok!" In a heterosexual, hopefully monogamous relationship as I'd been in a homosexual one.

 

I'm referring to straight people too. Gay and straight people have gotten infected in monogamous relationships. In fact, I would be more inclined to use condoms with a wife if we weren't trying to make a baby. If I'm married to an HIV- man (and, possibly, a positive but undetectable person; I'd have to do some research on it first), I wouldn't use condoms. Why should I? I have nothing to worry about. If I felt a need for condoms, it would be because I don't trust him. In that case, I either wouldn't marry him in the first place or our relationship is likely heading toward a dark place and inevitable divorce.

Only reason I would feel a need for that is if we occasionally open our bedroom up to third parties. I don't know if I'd be into that kind of thing, but I'm not definitively against it.

 

I can appreciate that. I've been married (to a woman) and the only time we used a condem was right after a baby was born, when she was nursing and couldn't use birth control. I've had monogamous relationships with dudes who were HIV+ and used a condem and those who were HIV- and sometimes did not. It does take a tremendous amount of trust (I like your take on truse @Jaa ) @Tyroc , yup, I been there too!

 

Appreciative of the honest answer.
I'm always somewhat sceptical of people who claim to have always in every sexual circumstance, to have used protection 100% of the time.

 

Yes. I think most people have had that one time that they reflect on waiting on the HIV test results to come back.

When I was in my long term relationship, we did not use condoms after a few years. Yes it takes trust but as I have said in the prior Activity Stream before these boards, if you are not too scared to test with me or try to avoid us we going to Walgreens and get an home HIV test to test together, that would give me pause.

 

Wait, they have HOME tests now!?
Wow! I am out of a loop.

 

yup... Walgreens, CVS, etc... check it out. They aren't cheap, but they exist.

 

Yep. Oraquick. Amazon even sells 2 packs.

 

I just looked up Oraquick. Wow! 20 minutes.
If someone hasn't already, they should find a way to combine it with a speed dating circle.

 

I watched a bit of Being Mary Jane season 3 and there's a scene where she invites her new *gasp* white buddy over for a booty call and immediately demands that they both take multiple home tests and share the results. You can see it at the link below. I would embed the video, but the Vimeo link won't take me to its source and I can't find it there for some reason.

Here’s the ‘Being Mary Jane’ Scene Every Woman NEEDS to Watch Before Getting With a New Man

 

Just watched it.
Booty calls sure have changed in the span of a few years.

 

I caught up today with an old friend, a straight guy, who has worked with HIV+ homeless men for over a decade. Recently, after he moved on to another position, he began to work with HIV+ transgendered men and women. He asked me what I thought about PrP. He had reservations about it. I asked whether it was because of the people he had been working with - homeless men and transgendered men and women, some of whom were also sex workers. He thought and said it was in part that. From his experience he saw that compliance - taking medication on a consistent schedule - was often not high. But then he said that he did not think it was right to restrict access based on a judgment of whether someone would behave properly. I raise this because I think we still have so many unanswered questions, but like my friend, I come down on the side of PrP. I just want to see more straightforward ads that reduce the cute and increase the real.