"Anonymous," "excessive," "bareback," "sex parties," "crystal meth," these were all words I loved to directly correlate to HIV infection in modern America. In fact, not only did I feel justified in using these words I felt righteous by not being a part of them either. But then, I was schooled. I was asked to look at the way I view the words I so matter-of-factly throw around. Excessive sex? What is excessive? Well, really, all excessive means is someone who has sex more than you. Anonymous? What's anonymous? Is anonymous knowing someone for 10 minutes or a full day, or less, or longer? Besides, having a circle jerk with 15 men is and always will be safer than having anal sex with one. Going further, performing oral sex on 3 men is still considered safer than having anal sex with 1. So, anonymous and excessive, where do you draw the line? Can you? I was beginning to find that even I was unable to put definition or quantification to these adjectives I so loved using. I was starting to find the amount to which you have sex matters less than the type of sex you're having.

"Bareback meth sex parties." This was a big one. This would be the largest hurdle to jump and one that also demanded the greatest amount of soul searching. I had this previous belief that despite how out and about I was that somewhere in this city and country there were scores of men attending parties where meth was freely passed around, men less-than-casually offered their holes and condoms were nowhere to be found. I also believed that these parties had some sort of unspoken recruitment process where they would encourage healthy, negative men to walk into their den of debauchery and walk out HIV+. But if this was happening, then where were they? And why, despite my being in the scene, haven't I heard more about it? Why haven't there been more reports of negative now-turned-positive men running from these parties yelling, "The bareback sex party HIV's are coming! The bareback sex party HIV's are coming! Watch out!"? It always seemed like these parties were a forecast of a thunderstorm that never came. That's because, despite how easy and tangible it is to blame these men and these communities, it simply isn't true to the level we think it is.

Yes, there are men who attend these parties, and yes some of them are reckless and some of them are high and some of them get HIV. And yes, we should be concerned, or angry, or upset, or frustrated but the majority of new HIV infections in this country aren't due to these barebackers and their sex parties, they only account for a minority of it. I know. Bummer, right? We so wanted to have a villain in all of this. It's easier that way.

But think about it yourself. Do you really think that in this world of modern information and STD knowledge that negative men are walking in by the gross to these parties and coming out positive? Do you really think that today's older and younger generations have such a high feeling of worthlessness that they're willing to throw themselves into these sloppy, sexual pits of hell? No, they're not. Some yes, sure. There will always be men who despite the most current and ubiquitous information will make the conscious or meth-rattled choice not to use a condom. Yet still, they're not to blame for any spikes or surges in current HIV rates.

The blame is on us. On all of us. It's within the simple human condition. We're people. We're not perfect and we all make mistakes. The majority of HIV infections in this country are happening in the antithesis of these bareback meth addicted sex parties. They're happening in "one time" mistakes, in "I should have been smarter" instances, in the "I just assumed he was safe" thought processes, in the "he's my boyfriend, I trusted him," in the "I'm a minority, I didn't know. I didn't think. I don't have the education," in the "English isn't my language" communities, in the "I'm young" reality, and in the "I don't know about condoms" of the abstinence-only world. Sure, positive men infect negative men. It's the only way the virus is transmitted, but keep in mind that much more often than not, it's "negative" men, unsure of their status, infecting negative men. And, yes, of course, there are men entirely knowledgeable of their positive status having unprotected sex with negative men. But as the old, tired, cliched saying goes, "it takes two to tango."

Is barebacking and the fetishizing of bareback sex a problem for the gay community and the younger generations? Absolutely. Is crystal meth a problem in the gay community? Without a doubt. Do these bareback sex parties exist? Yes. Are they at the forefront of ongoing HIV infections? No, they're not. They're just a minority of people, within a minority, making the choices they choose to make. We all have the ability to make choices. I can only hope we choose to make the right ones for ourselves. Understand it takes more than knee-jerk moralizing to see who is getting infected and how and where and why.

Take your finger off the trigger, click your safety back on, and dislodge the, "your-lifestyle-is-dirtier-than-mine" bullet and think twice before reloading and taking aim at another problem.