Advertising | AIDS/HIV | News

Protect Your Love: VIDEO

Protectyourlove

A beautiful new safe-sex campaign from the Alliance for South Asian AIDS Prevention (ASAAP).

Check it out, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. A Beautiful Campaign. I'm Going Out Right Now And Having Safe Sex!!! Xoxo's ;)

    Posted by: Anthony | Jun 18, 2012 1:34:42 PM


  2. Does anyone ever promote monogamy as a safe-sex strategy?

    Posted by: One Life, One Love | Jun 18, 2012 2:00:07 PM


  3. One Life, sometimes both are necessary and a lovely campaign such as this one can validate & remind us of how we live.

    I've been in a relationship for 19 years (on July 2nd) and as of 2 months ago, my partner is still negative. We are both alive & thriving, me because of my meds and him because of our safe sex. We protect our love.

    Posted by: theonlyhankinla | Jun 18, 2012 2:17:13 PM


  4. WOne life. One love SO TRUE. How about a campaign promoting gay monogamy?

    Posted by: Munro | Jun 18, 2012 2:23:19 PM


  5. That couple looks like an 'in love' couple, not a one night standing it couple in which case they would not be using condoms unless one of them was poz or the bottom hasnt washed his butt. And on that note im gonna go lie down and take a nap.

    Posted by: Munro | Jun 18, 2012 2:27:47 PM


  6. Because even mostly monogamous couples who love each other very, very much may occasionally "slip up," and it's good to have safe sex practices at the forefront of one's mind at all times. (I think the visual metaphors, especially pulling one's loved one out of the way of the oncoming car, are very strong and thought-provoking, i.e. "Then why would you want to put him in harm's way via unsafe sex?"

    Posted by: Dback | Jun 18, 2012 2:37:07 PM


  7. "Occasional slip-ups" are not the same thing as monogamy.

    Posted by: For The Record | Jun 18, 2012 2:47:50 PM


  8. I would oppose a campaign to promote "monogamy" (in quotes because, etymologically, it means "one wife" which, to me, doesn't seem appropriate for a pair of men). Look at the chaos that the ideal of monogamy has made in the straight community; that should be convincing enough. Let's have couples decide for themselves how open, GGG, or otherwise they want to be. We should be past the time when social stereotypes and ideals straightjacket the life choices of couples. Maybe we can rescue "marriage" by eliminating some of the stupider restrictions presumed to go with it.

    Posted by: Chuck Mielke | Jun 18, 2012 2:50:13 PM


  9. @ChuckMielke: Be honest. You're not opposing the pro-monogamy on etymological grounds. If you were, you'd proposed a pro-fidelity campaign.

    And no one here seems to be proposing the imposition of anything on anyone. Couples can decide for themselves how safe they want to be. Monogamy/fidelity is just another approach.

    Posted by: For The Record | Jun 18, 2012 3:08:09 PM


  10. @ONE LIFE, ONE LOVE: Yes, although not often enough. Most people working in public health in std prevention in the LGBT community would laugh at you if you proposed it. Older gay people are more resistant than young people, who are less about the free love thing, so maybe we'll see a change as the ranks of public health leaders turn over.

    That said, there will always be a small group of very high-risk people who just want to have lots of sex with multiple partners, and population-level reduction in an STD is often most cost-effectively managed by targeting these people (condoms, testing, pre-exposure prophylactic drugs).

    If you ask me it should be an all-encompassing promotion: monogamy, use protection, get tested. But there is no substitute for comprehensive sexual education in schools, including gay-specific issues.

    Posted by: AT | Jun 18, 2012 4:45:27 PM


  11. "I think the visual metaphors, especially pulling one's loved one out of the way of the oncoming car, are very strong and thought-provoking, i.e. "Then why would you want to put him in harm's way via unsafe sex?""

    Why would you want to put him in harm's way by having sex with anyone other than him?

    Posted by: eplin | Jun 18, 2012 5:20:25 PM


  12. I don't see how this video doesn't promote monogomy.

    Isn't the point "protect your love"! To me, ALWAYS using condoms even in a monotonous relationship means you are committed to protecting each other no matter what, because you love each other. I've never imagined that my would-be husband and I ALWAYS using condoms in any way was an implicit consent to cheating or any sexual activiy outside the relationship. Quite the contrary: Always using condoms meant were so dedicated to each other that we were unwilling to agree to allow a non-condom-using habit to deveop at all because we each loved the other so much that we put the long-term safety of the other above imagined sexual thrill or imagined intimacy boost of no condoms, recognizing the hypothetical possibility that over time, there might be rough patches where one of us messes up during precisely a poor-communication time in the relationship.

    Committing to always use condoms said to both of us that we loved each other so much that we were committed to love the other as a person even in the event our relationship went awry for any period of time. It said we loved each other more even than we loved the relationship itself. Our love for each other extended to doing things that protected each other even if for some reasons things could possibly split us up in the future.

    To me, that sort of complete love is SO much more intimate, satisfying, and fulfilling than any thrill or claimed "intimacy" you claim to physically perceive while having sex without a condom. Heck, even now that the love of my life and I have sadly separated after nearly a decade--including many years of bliss--I'll take the kind of expression of love and intimacy based on always using a condom even in our monogomous relationship ANY DAY over the claimed fleeting "intimacy" and "love" supposedly experienced in condomless sex used as a crutch to prove to each other that you are monogomous:

    what if one of you cheats? Then the other is not only heartbroken and feeling betrayed, but maybe also stuck with some disease passed onto him while the two were claiming no condoms showed their commitment and honesty. Chew on that, ya bareback apologists.

    Posted by: Just_a_guy | Jun 18, 2012 7:32:27 PM


  13. Haha, I hate that iPhone autocorrect changes "monogomous" to "monotonous."

    That's bogus.

    And a weird messed-up way that Apple, Inc., is dissing on happy monogomous couples?

    Posted by: Just_a_guy | Jun 18, 2012 7:34:58 PM


  14. What's more, I don't think I'm making an overstatement to say that the most truly satsifying sex each of us will have in our lifetimes will be with someone we are madly in love with, cherish, and trust.

    In addition, I've seen multiple psychologists and self-help gurus point out that we can develop our best habits and work on our personhood most easily in the context and with the love and support of our life partners.

    So, if you love your bf or husband, and acknowledge the fact that at least periods of discontent or separation--if not actual ultimate breakup--are a distinct possiblity no matter how deeply you are in love or for how long...

    Why would you want your bf or husband--who you LOVE, and LOVE more than even the relationship itself--to have developed a habit of no condom usage that could seriously sacrifice his health if the relationship ever fell through or went on hiatus? And why would you want the best sex your bf or husband to have ever had (the sex with you) to have involved unsafe condomless sex--and thereby risk him someday VERY unsafely trying to recreate that missed intimacy and satisfaction with condomless sex outside of the confines of that relationship should it ever fall through or go on hiatus?

    It's a no-brainer to me. Of COURSE you ALWAYS use condoms even in a monogomous relationship. If there is any arguable physical perception or thrill sacrificed, there are other ways to make sex satisfying or thrilling. And if the claim is that intimacy is lost, is there really greater intimacy than knowing the context, your partner, etc., and sharing the intimacy of truly caring about each other?

    That said, I don't disrespect other couples who disagree with me, but I would be worried for them if anything ever fell through: And if THAT worry is what maybe they imagine keeps them together, I'm not convinced that's a satisfying togetherness.

    Anyone hear me on this stuff?

    Posted by: just_a_guy | Jun 18, 2012 8:06:36 PM


  15. Why do people want to "promote" monogamy? Do these couples who brag about being together for upteen years think they're better than someone who doesn't want to be monogamous for whatever reason? Live and let live those whose choice of lifestyle does no harm within society.

    Posted by: Sqqueak | Jun 22, 2012 2:48:48 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Madonna Shooting 'Turn Up the Radio' Video in Florence, Italy: PHOTO« «