Important note: Information in this article was accurate in 1997. The state of the art may have changed since the publication date.
 |
The San Francisco Examiner - Tuesday, June 17, 1997
A PUSH is on in San Francisco to allow sex clubs to contain private rooms where patrons can participate in sexual activities free from prying eyes.
This, of course, begs a more basic question: Why, in the midst of an AIDS epidemic, does The City tolerate sex clubs in the first place?
The private-room proposal was defeated last week by a 5-1 vote of The City's Human Rights Commission after an advisory committee had recommended in its favor. Proponents say they won't give up the fight.
Clearly, this is an issue for the Health Commission. The fact that it wound up before the Human Rights Commission is one indicator of how screwed up The City's priorities are. But the real culprits are the supervisors, who either want to ignore the issue or treat it as the cutting edge of gay rights. Neither way is correct.
City Hall ought not to be in the business of promoting disease and death. It shouldn't condone businesses that make money while putting their customers' lives at risk. And it shouldn't pretend that a few pamphlets, warning signs and free condoms will stop people from careless sex practices that allow the transmission of HIV.
The answer isn't licensing. It isn't looser regulation. It's shutting down the clubs.
Let the supervisors answer three questions.
Question 1: Does unsafe sex occur at sex clubs? If you answer no, you can't be wearing a straight face.
Question 2: Would more unsafe sex occur at sex clubs if private rooms were allowed? You bet your life.
Question 3: Would less unsafe sex occur at sex clubs if they didn't exist? OK, this is a bit of a trick question, but the answer is one the supervisors don't want to deal with.
Sex club operators argue that - through a combination of education and enforcement - their clubs actually reduce the total incidence of unsafe sex. Besides being self-serving, this is impossible to prove.
Common sense suggests otherwise. Sex clubs exist for a basic purpose. It's a case of "build it and they will come." Brochures are no barrier against disease, and free condoms only work when used. If someone is intent on practicing unsafe sex, he or she will find a way - in club or out.
Nobody wants to turn government into sex cops. What people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms isn't anybody's business, least of all City Hall's. But in a commercial establishment that caters to sex-seekers, The City has a legitimate interest - and a responsibility - to protect the health and safety of citizens.
City officials in the early '80s, citing a public health emergency, closed down the town's gay bathhouses, which had been identified as a primary contributor to the AIDS epidemic. If the urgency seems any less today, just ask the families of the hundreds of San Franciscans who die of AIDS each year.
The sex club issue is sometimes cast as gay vs. straight. It's not. It's life vs. death. The sexual orientation of a pay-to-play club shouldn't matter one bit. Homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, transsexual - The City shouldn't olerate sex clubs, in the midst of an AIDS epidemic, that are run as commercial establishments.
We challenge the Board of Supervisors to come up with a rationale for keeping the sex clubs open. We think there's a solid one to support closing them down: Prevention of disease and death.
970617
SE970605
Copyright © 1997 - San Francisco Examiner. All rights reserved. Reproduced with permission. Reproduction of this article (other than one copy for personal reference) must be cleared through the San Francisco Examiner, Permissions Desk, 110 Fifth Street, P.O. Box 7260, San Franciso, CA 94120.
AEGiS is made possible through unrestricted grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, Elton John AIDS Foundation, iMetrikus, Inc., John M. Lloyd Foundation, the National Library of Medicine, and donations from users like you. Always watch for outdated information. This article first appeared in 1997. This material is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between you and your doctor.
AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.
Copyright ©1980, 1997. AEGiS. All materials appearing on AEGiS are protected by copyright as a collective work or compilation under U.S. copyright and other laws and are the property of AEGiS, or the party credited as the provider of the content. .