Annotated Bibliography Two – Annotation Ten

“1998wp98.Jpg (554×768).” Accessed November 3, 2017. http://saintatlarge.com/wp-content/uploads/photo-gallery/1998wp98.jpg.

saint valentine’s white party

This source is a poster and flyer advertising the Saint-at-Large’s 1998 White Party.

The White Party is a celebration of February’s Valentine’s Day, and is a “complement to its infamously salacious sister The Black Party” (McEwan). The White Party is a little sweeter, and a little more innocent than the Black Party, but is just as scantily clad as any other party at the Saint. When Bruce Mailman, the Saint’s founder, commissioned a photo shoot of muscular men stripped down to their white underwear for that year’s White Party advertisement, the White Party transformed into the “hottest underwear party of the year” and has remained that way since (McEwan).

1998

The poster for the 1998 White Party features eight copies of a man with brilliant blue butterfly wings similar to the color of neon blue lights. Indigo coloring enhances the brightness of the iridescent blue found in the center of the thick butterfly wings.

The man’s wings are stunning and appear to be digitally altered for the purpose of enhancing their color. Violet and indigo streaks express the texture of the wings by giving three-dimensional volume to an otherwise flat surface. The wings almost look like the feather fans burlesque dancers perform with. They appear to be soft, thick, and pliant.

The man’s flexible wings have a black border. A thin black strip runs across the top of the wings, whereas the wings’ sides possess a thicker black margin.

Five white circles within the black margin dot the wings’ pointed tips near their upper brow.

Red circles appear like shadowed reflections beneath the white polka dot circles above them. The red circles are arranged along the entire length of the wings and reveal the slight concavity found in the middle of each wing.

the blue morpho butterfly man

The wings look like the wings that belong to the blue morpho butterfly, which can be seen below. According to the Rainforest Alliance, the blue morpho butterfly is one of the largest butterflies in the world. Its wingspan ranges from a width of 5 to 8 inches.

Light-reflecting microscopic scales reside on the backs of the blue morpho’s wings; these scales give the morpho’s wings their vivid color, whereas the underside of the butterfly’s wings sports black eye-spots and brown camouflage.

Common Morpho Butterfly. Image Credit: Meijer Gardens

Because of its dichotomous coloring, in flight, the blue morpho butterfly appears to disappear and reappear in thin air (“Blue Morpho Butterly”). When closed or folded, the blue morpho’s brown wings match its tropical forest surroundings and better conceal the butterfly from predators. Blue morphos can be found in many of Latin America’s tropical forests. 

Adult blue morpho butterflies prefer to remain camouflaged by keeping their wings folded and spending most of their time near the lower shrubs or leaves of the forest floor.

During the mating season, however, blue morpho butterflies fly across many of the levels of the forest, and present their brilliant blue wings during this time. 

Morphos enjoy sunbathing, and have been observed lounging in large groups underneath the sky’s warm sunshine “above the treetops” by many pilots (“Blue Morpho Butterly”). See a bathing blue morpho butterfly below:

Blue morpho butterfly basking in sun. by Bug of the Week

On the 1998 White Party poster, a butterfly man appears in eight separate replicas, whose images are evenly spaced and neatly organized. The image of the butterfly man repeats twice across four separate rows.

Thus, two butterfly men occupy each of four rows on the poster where the butterfly men are present.

The images of the blue butterfly men are brightened by the stark white background that they appear on.The man’s body lies in between either iridescent wing, exactly where a butterfly’s body would be found in nature.

The man’s human body is discernible only by his torso, neck, and face. The bottom half of his figure has been transmuted into the abdomen of a butterfly, which begins at his waist.

Image Credit: Greenville Elementary
Image Credit: Tom Hilton

The man’s butterfly abdomen is a deep indigo or violet color. The abdomen contains magenta splotches in its center column, and ripples with clearly defined segments. The man’s butterfly abdomen looks like a merman’s tail, especially given that the insect body part extends from his waist. However, the butterfly abdomen’s pointed tip differentiates it from a merman’s tail.

vulnerability

The butterfly man appears to be on display:

Open for admiration and observation, the butterfly man lays naked and exposed, completely defenseless. His unprotected, shirtless chest is further elevated towards the viewer due to the position of the man’s constrained hands.

He has been laid bare, like the butterflies found behind the glass casings of private butterfly collections.

He even appears to have been deified and splayed over an invisible crucifix.

The man’s flexed, muscular arms are raised above his head. The inside of his elbows nearly touch the sides of his head as his wrists come into contact with each other, his left arm overlaying his right.

His hands are splayed, with fingers that are open, unfurled, and straight. His large biceps and triceps elongate his torso as he stretches.

author-edited photo. Image Credit: Saint at Large

The shadows of the lights under which the photo of the butterfly man’s form was taken disguise his eyes.

Similar shadows contour the man’s muscled chest and darken the man’s armpits, forearms, and left hand.

The butterfly man appears to the viewer like an offering, sacrifice, or even a snack.

when and where

Light gray text the color of a rain cloud appears below the startling blue butterfly men.

The first line states THE SAINT AT LARGE PRESENTS in small font, beneath which appear the words THE WHITE PARTY in large, legibly elegant font.

Beneath the announcement of the WHITE Party is the date that the celebration was meant to take place. The date has been centered between the two vertical edges of the flyer; it announces that Saturday, February 14, 1998, is the date of that year’s White Party.

A gray line sections off the rest of the text beneath the major declarations.

 

Music: Joe D’Espinosa

Lights: Richard Sabala

 

ROSELAND

239 West 52nd Street

Doors open at 10pm

Dancing till 3pm Sunday

Dress: White

 

Advance Tickets:

$40 (plus service charges) from Ticketmaster (212) 307-7171

$40 cash only at Raymond Dragon 130 7th Avenue

Day of Event Tickets

$50 Roseland Box Office, 239 West 52nd Street
Starting at 12 noon and subject to availability
www.saintatlarge.com
The text found beneath the gray line all appear in three organized chunks alongside one another.

discussion of tHe source

This White Party poster is a valuable source because it demonstrates the Saint-at-Large’s spectacular artistry, and furthers my understanding of the legacy of the Saint’s celebrations.

Tradition, memorial, and loyal reverence dictate that the Saint-at-Large remain respectful to and expressive of its metaphorical bloodline the Saint. However, throughout the years, the ingenuity and proficiency with which the Saint franchise continues to dazzle spectators with such inventive works of art is stunning.

Throughout my research, it has become evermore apparent that the Saint did not resonate emotionally with crowds only because of its music or its energy or its lighting technology. All of these factors collaborated with one another to create the unique experience that members of the Saint enjoyed during its reign.

Now a new generation can appreciate the immersive environment of a disco highly skilled in stimulating the human senses and producing unforgettable nights.

This poster for the White Party demonstrates yet another element of the inventive character of the Saint franchise: its print advertisements, flyers, and posters.

Unfortunately, I was not able to analyze an original version of the White Party flyer/poster, and could only view the content digitally.

The lack of a tangible representation of the original 1998 White Party poster/flyer limit my interpretation of the flyer.

I do not know the dimensions of the flyer/poster, or what it felt like.

I also could not read the small text given in the bottom right vertical edge of the poster because I could not focus the image well enough to perceive its meaning.

However, this rendition of the original 1998 flyer is still constructive in increasing awareness of the legacy of the Saint’s creative talent.

Annotated Bibliography Two – Annotation Five

AnOther. “A Rare Glimpse Into 1970s New York City Club Culture.” AnOther. Accessed October 10, 2017. http://www.anothermag.com/art-photography/8415/a-rare-glimpse-into-1970s-new-york-city-club-culture.

Meisler’s Childhood Inspirations

Meryl Meisler is a Long Island photographer known for capturing quirky, humorous, and theatrical photographs. In 2016, Meisler premiered an exhibition of her young adulthood, which traversed the decades of the 1970s and 1980s.
Meisler’s exhibition opened at the Steven Kasher gallery in New York City, New York.
Growing up in the North Massepequa suburbs, Meisler matured whilst surrounded by the subjects of her first “serious” photographs: Meisler’s relatives, neighbours, and […] best friends.” Describing her collection as a “retrospective of [her] life in the 70s,” Meisler depicts photographs of New York nightclubs, sunny summers at Fire Island, and memories of her childhood home (qtd. in “A Rare Glimpse”).
MOVING ON UP
When Meisler moved to the upper west side of New York, she was embraced by a “diverse group” of poets and musicians. Living with her distantly related cousin and other “completely different types of people,” Meisler felt sure that she was home and in a place that was both comforting and compelling (qtd. in “A Rare Glimpse”).
Meryl Meisler “carried [her] camera everywhere,” hoping to capture every “thrilling” moment of her new life (qtd. in “A Rare Glimpse”) in the city. Having just come out, moved out, and struggled through “economic and social difficulties,” Meisler felt extraordinarily thankful that she had found a place where she “belonged” (qtd. in “A Rare Glimpse”).

Meisler began to frequent disco clubs in the area and grew immensely fond of their energy and charm. At first, Meisler primarily attended CBGB, where one of the two photographs I have included in this annotation, was captured. See above.

However, Meisler also “went with a friend to Studio 54,” and “loved it!” (qtd. in “A Rare Glimpse”).

Meisler also loved to dance. However, no nightclub was complete without Meisler’s handheld camera, which she often brought with her onto the dancefloors of various disco clubs, into the crowds and throbbing sounds of the deejay’s sonic magic.

Meisler claims that she “went to all the hot clubs in Manhattan,” and asserts that she “preferred the music in the clubs.” She also enjoyed the “mixed” atmosphere of the clubs she partied in, never wanting to attend “only gay nights, or only lesbian nights” (qtd. in “A Rare Glimpse”).

Channeling Brassaï

Taking photographs on the dance floors of disco clubs sometimes produced images that were “really not safe for work” (qtd. in “A Rare Glimpse”). The people Meryl Meisler encountered on the floors of disco clubs were really “friendly;” she was always able to dance with strangers, and later photograph them, even if they were in states of sensual and sexual expression.

In this article, Meisler states that there are some “people in [her] show that are totally naked, yet [are] very comfortable with being photographed, because [she] danced with them on the weekends” (qtd. in “A Rare Glimpse”).

Inspired by the French-Hungarian photographer, Brassaï, who took photographs of Paris and Parisians in the night, Meryl Meisler documents the nightlife of New York City in an exhibition of her experience within the disco dance scene.

Meryl Meisler was young when she started attending dance clubs, but, generally, always had a very positive experience in the clubs. As a young queer Jewish woman, Meisler remembers that “everyone was very friendly, warm, joyful, having a ball and finding themselves” (qtd. in “A Rare Glimpse”). Alongside those changing adolescents, Meryl Meisler, too, began to mature and grow in confidence, both in her identity and in her art. On the dance-floor, through the lens of her camera, Meisler came of age.

But she had fun doing it. Meryl Meisler “felt like [she] was living [her] nightlife,” when she hopped from one club to the next, night after night. In the article, Meisler discloses that it was “a good thing that the doorman at Studio 54 liked us,” indicating that the doorman’s favor was likely the reason she could enter and enjoy Studio 54. However, “if the guy at the door that liked you wasn’t there, you’d go to another club” Meisler adds (qtd. in “A Rare Glimpse).

CLUB-HOPPING WAS A TYPE OF DISRESPECT

Meisler’s club-hopping undermines the importance of membership at disco clubs like Studio 54 or the Saint.

Carol Cooper writes in her article “Disco Knights: Hidden Heroes of The New York Dance Music Underground,” that the “best golden-era deejays worked hard to mark each night they played a special event, which is how membership-only spots developed” (Cooper, 165). People “proved [their] appreciation [of particular venues] by becoming a dues-paying member” (Cooper, 165).

At The Loft, founder David Mancuso threatened to withdraw patrons’ membership if they did not attend his private disco parties on a weekly basis. To Mancuso, the presence and feedback of the audience was just as important as the disc jockey’s musical compositions in the booth. To Mancuso, those savoring the musical, sensual, and transcendent fruits of disco clubs should, in turn, offer their thanks and appreciation by becoming paying members.

To Carol Cooper, “building that sense of interdependence between a deejay and his or her public was the key to the growth of black radio in this country, and subsequently the key to the growth of a dance music community out of the disco underground” (165). Thus Meryl Meisler’s club-hopping might have been frowned upon by some disco owners, who felt that the crafts hosted within their clubs deserved commitment.

a discussion of meisler’s narrative

Meisler’s narration of her experiences during the 1970s provide a personal, subjective insight into the goings on of popular disco clubs. Her narrative serves as a specific historical account of the disco era, which narrows one’s perceptions of the era to precise moments in time and intimately connects an observer to an otherwise foreign epoch.

The photographs included in this article are expressive and impactful; they serve as communicative devices beyond the somewhat flat affect of written accounts. Photographs from inside of the disco clubs one reads about do well to express the physicality and attitude of the club as well as its attendees.

In contrast, Meisler’s verbal account of her experience during the 70s leaves the reader grasping for more information, details, and stories. Though somewhat lacking in volume, Meisler’s memories still attempt to satisfy the dilemma introduced in Carol Cooper’s article “Disco Knights: Hidden Heroes of New York Dance Music Underground.”

Currently, the disco era suffers from a lack of firsthand documentation of the disco experience from the people “most qualified” to report on the era (Cooper, 164). In this article, Meryl Meisler’s storytelling attempts to provide such firsthand documentation, even if she lacks the details of the inner workings of disco clubs that owners, DJs, or other staff members would have been able to share. Her account still delves the reader deeper, personally, into an era he or she may be unfamiliar with.

Read more about why the disco era lacks firsthand documentation beneath the MISSING FIRSTHAND DOCUMENTATION header on this annotation, found near the bottom.

Annotated Bibliography Two – Annotation Two

Rist, Darrell Yates. “A Scaffold To the Sky And No Regrets.” New York Native, 2 May 1988, pp. 17-18. 

controversy at the new york native

The New York Native is responsible for publishing the first public report on AIDS, with an article headlined “Disease Rumors Largely Unfounded.” In this May 1981 article, the Native’s medical correspondent, Lawrence D. Mass, wrote that the rare cancer that had struck some gay men was “ubiquitous.” The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) had denied the rumors of a “gay cancer” on a phone call with Mass, after which Mass wrote that most people have an immunity to the viral subject of the rumors. How wrong Lawrence D. Mass was proven to be later on. Nevertheless, the Native’s article, which dismissed the severity of HIV and AIDS, stands as the first published report on what became a horrific epidemic.

However, Larry Kramer, a playwright and distinguished activist during the AIDS epidemic and onward, wrote in the New York Native in March 1983. His piece, entitled “1, 112, and Counting,” was a fierce criticism of the contemptible inaction of healthcare organizations in the United States in response to AIDS. Thus, the Native once expressed rally cries for the queer community being afflicted by the violent, deadly disease. The newspaper was historic in its coverage of AIDS, and possessed a circulation of 20,000 in the early 1980’s, meaning that the Native distributed 20,000 copies on an average day. However, the newspaper’s circulation dropped to 8,000 as time went on.

Though the newspaper once hoped to increase awareness of the AIDS epidemic by writing on the injustice of the government and national media’s silence on the public health crisis, the New York Native later descended into an ugly mire of controversial theories. Hosting conspiracy theories about the real cause of AIDS, which was apparently not HIV but the African Swine Fever Virus (or was it Chronic Fatigue Syndrome?), the newspaper officially closed in 1997 due to “financial difficulties” (Pogrebin). Founder Charles Orteb oversaw the newspaper as a publisher and editor for over sixteen years, yet even he could not deny that the paper’s controversy contributed to its financial decline. The paper’s “insane tangent” even denied that AIDS existed (Pogrebin). ACT UP, the now international action advocacy group that serves and advocates for people living with HIV and AIDS, boycotted the New York Native in the mid-1980’s.

goodbye to the saint

Written in 1988, the following article by Darrell Yates Rist belonged to a newspaper that had by then descended into troubling, controversial conspiracies surrounding AIDS. While this article deals directly with the founder of The Saint dance club and the St. Mark’s Baths, Bruce Mailman, it is important to note the controversy surrounding not only the article’s subject, but also the article’s place of publication. However, this article is still valuable despite its controversial container paper. The article was written on May 2nd, 1988, a mere two days after The Saint officially closed. May 2nd, however, is also the day that the Saint’s last celebration ended, during that Monday’s “early afternoon” (Dunlap). The interview is a primary source given right at the moment of The Saint’s closing, when Mailman’s emotions were fresh.

Issue 263 of the New York Native, which Rist’s article is a part of, features an extended spread of articles categorized by the header GOODBYE TO THE SAINT. Darrell Yates Rist wrote about an interview with The Saint’s founder, Bruce Mailman. Other “remembrances” were written by Andrew Holleran, Jan Carl Park, R.J. Markson, and J.P.David.

In all caps, the words GOODBYE TO THE SAINT have been printed in a non-serif white font over a 9.75 inch (24.8 centimeter) narrow black strip. Underneath this header is a blueprint of The Saint dance club, which has the article’s title in white serif font in the top row of the map.  At the bottom, the words An Interview With Bruce Mailman On the Occasion of the Closing of the Saint appear in smaller, italicized font similar to the font of the article’s title.

The blueprint of The Saint is dominated by a plan for its central sky-like dome and light platform, beneath which is the dance floor. The Saint itself contained a “4800 square-foot oak surface” as a dance floor, and “a lighting tower with about 1,500 fixtures, topped by a planetarium-style star projector.” A mirror ball could be lowered from the ceiling, and The Saint’s dome acted as a “theatrical scrim” (Dunlap).

a dreamer’s beginning

Around 1980, Bruce Mailman decided that he no longer wanted to spend money on his vices. Mailman “loved dancing,” and would often haunt the Flamingo dance club to do so. To Mailman, Flamingo represented the “zenith” of dance’s physicality. The club’s “hard-driving, sexual” beat fueled Mailman’s romance with his disco dancing vice.

Studio 54, a famous nightclub and discotheque, possessed “imagination and theatricality.” Together, these combined elements provided a formative experience to Mailman and prompted him to create his own haven of vices that he could go to for free. Mailman wanted to build a home for his vices so he could indulge them “for nothing.” He says that the urge to create his own space always occurs if he has a particular vice or desire; he never wants to continue paying money for something he could design or engineer himself.

Bruce Mailman’s desires were elevated by his intention to add a new dimension to the disco scene.

Mimicry was unacceptable; Mailman wanted to devise something new, but, at first, he could not figure out what to do. One night, Mailman went to sleep pondering ideas for his new club of vices. The next morning, Mailman awoke with the image of a planetarium in his mind.

The club he envisioned wouldn’t be “limited to a stage.” What would become The Saint would be “completely round,” with a large dome sky. To Mailman, this feature would make it seem like club-goers were dancing outside. Mailman immediately began calling planetarium companies to see if his fantasy could become a practical and affordable reality. Was there any place big enough to hold a starry dome?

Fortunately, there was. Mailman revolutionized the Loew’s Commodore Theater for nearly $5,000,000 US dollars in 1980. Located on Second Avenue and East Sixth Street, the Commodore Theater underwent a truly heavenly transformation for The Saint’s opening. A modeled hemisphere of earth and the Milky Way contributed to the The Saint’s otherworldly allure, whilst sophisticated lighting platforms and hydraulic floors advanced the club experience to an enlightened level.

The Saint’s eventual opening is an unforgettable story. In order to spread awareness about his new club, Bruce Mailman asked ten people he knew went out regularly to ask ten people they knew who went out regularly to come to the Saint. Open only to gays, The Saint attracted many gorgeous gay men on its opening night who all shared a love for dancing and having a good time. At midnight on a 1980 September morning, nearly 3500 men lined almost an entire square block hoping to get into The Saint. The fire lieutenant came to shut down the commotion, but Mailman’s lawyer defended his club by stating that it cost a lot of money and would surely “be around [for] eight seasons.”

So The Saint was born. Mailman stated that the appeal of The Saint was that “it was a place where you were special if you came.” Other discotheques attracted the stars and celebrities as famed, esteemed guests. Yet at The Saint, “no one looked at other people.” The people themselves “were the stars,” and their “anonymity” made their experience all the more exciting. The Saint was a place of drugs, sex, and “decadent” sin. Darrell Yates Rist, this article’s author, remembers “a perpetually euphoric storm of orgies in the balcony above the planetarium dome” as well as the “endless fountain of drugs from […] men who themselves were intoxicating.” Yet soon controversy began to swirl around the Saint’s owner, Bruce Mailman.

accusations against mailman

People began to accuse Mailman of condoning the transmission of HIV and AIDS. Some said Mailman was liable for his inaction. Others called him a “killer” because of the known sexual acts that took place in the balcony of his club’s haven. No one was safe once the “Saint’s disease” struck; people accused Mailman of not doing enough to stop HIV and AIDS from devastating the community of clubgoers and other persons associated with the Saint (Dunlap).

In his interview with Rist, Mailman insists that the balcony was never intended to be used for sex. He swears that he tried time and time again to get people to stop using the balcony for sex by writing to members; however, Mailman certainly did not desire to police people’s behavior by metaphorically “hosing [them] down.”

Mailman is “not happy” if “someone was harmed” in his club by contracting HIV, but he has “no regrets.” Mailman does not believe that people should look back and say that they shouldn’t have engaged in sexual activity in the clubs or elsewhere; he feels that gay men “fought hard to be at that level of liberalization,” and that such free expression was not inappropriate or foolish, but delivering.

Mailman does not feel that gay men should be sorry for what they did when they engaged in sex at clubs like The Saint. He states that “we [gay people] needed to be there,” declaring that he does not think that “we can look at [our behavior] with what’s happened to us, with this thing that’s marched into our lives and say, ‘Well, we shouldn’t have done that. We were what we were for very good reasons, and we’ve changed – for equally good reasons.'”

the saint was revered

There is no denying that Bruce Mailman created a phenomenal institution.

According to author Darrell Yates Rist, the club’s “divine” DJs “transformed” the souls of dancers. Bruce Mailman notes that the DJs at the Saint all had a unique style and flavor, and often were allowed to “experiment with the crowd.” The DJs “had something special that was their own.” The way they dealt with different currents of music was electric. Some of the DJs Mailman lists as “big DJs” are Terry Sherman, Robbie Leslie, and Michael Fierman. Shawn Buchanan is another DJ from the club, who “to some extent,” was also a big-name act. Buchanan has been memorialized on the AIDS Quilt on Block 1087. Read a description of this panel here.

To Mailman, music at The Saint was “much more important than at the other places.” People came to The Saint to dance, and would remain there for six to eight hours. Unlike Studio 54, where people “had a drink,” or Palladium, where people “danced two dances and talked,” The Saint was where people came to dance. There was a “group energy” that connected people to each other and to the lights and to the sound. There was a “euphoric” atmosphere in The Saint when things were “really connecting.” Though euphoric escapades did not embrace The Saint’s dancers every night, the rapture of the club’s energy happened often enough for people to continue coming back. Yet rapidly, the excitement of clubbing turned to a dreadful misery.

fear

With the sudden onslaught of HIV and AIDS, many people who went to The Saint, began dying in mass numbers. Many others had friends who had fallen ill or worse to the disease, including author Darrell Yates Rist.

The “ghosts of friends” haunted the lives of many people in the gay community of New York City. People stopped coming to the Saint because of the fear of AIDS. Most of the crowd that had frequented the Saint were older gay men who had either died from AIDS or were grappling with the devastating grief of knowing those who had died from AIDS.

Though a younger crowd began to populate the Saint, they didn’t come as often to the club as older members once did because they didn’t have as much money. Financial troubles began to appear on the horizon. Bruce Mailman began to feel that he could only own the club “for so long.” The stigma attached to The Saint did not help its case either, which repelled people away from The Saint with the knowledge that the members who had “made such an impression” on the club were now dead because of AIDS.

In the article, Mailman acknowledges that he no longer has “[his] finger on the pulse of what [the] market is” for the disco lovers now dispirited and demoralized by the ruins AIDS spread across the country. Both with his raunchy bathhouse, St. Mark’s Baths, and his discotheque, the Saint, Bruce Mailman has been wrapped in the controversy of whether or not he acted morally as the descent of AIDS began to devastate his establishments. In response to his known controversy, Mailman states the following:

“Revision [..] is a big problem in gay life. People want to say ‘Oh, it shouldn’t have been this way.’ I think they should say, ‘What we had was wonderful. Then something walked in and disrupted it and we’re building something else. And we’re going to make that wonderful, too. No one asked for this. […] Of all the things that happened in the Saint, maybe the number of membership letters that came back stamped ‘deceased’ got to me. I mean, maybe that is responsible for my overload or for the fact I’m so fed up, and maybe if that hadn’t happened, I would have gone on and on doing it-and loved it.”

And you do get tired of being in the center of all the controversy with it, too. I mean, you know-the baths and whether or not my positions were right or wrong. There’s that whole things that’s disheartening and eventually wears you away and eventually, you just…you don’t want to do it any more. It’s not that you don’t believe in it or you don’t believe it was good. You just know it’s over.”

See photos of The Saint

These are other photographs from the newspaper that date it to the 80s (aged paper, dated photographic quality) as well as inform the observer that the New York Native is a gay newspaper (it features many ads of hot hunks waiting for a call). 

Annotated Bibliography Two – Annotation One

“SAFER SEX GUIDELINES FOR GAY MEN (& EVERYONE).” New York Native, 2 May 1988, p. 45. 

safe sex is sexy!

The New York Native is a bi-weekly newspaper that ran from 1980 to 1997, which began its publication in December of 1980. Gay men and lesbians comprised the newspaper’s audience, whose home-base was in New York City, New York. Over time, this NYC newspaper grew in influence, eventually becoming one of the United States of America’s most prominent gay publications of its time. In 1984, the New York Native claimed a readership of 80,000 people, though it later suffered great controversy and public disdain. 

Issue 263 of the New York Native, published on May 2nd, 1988, features guidelines to safer sex presented by the Gay Men’s Health Crisis (GMHC) in small font under its LOVERS ONLY header. Copyrighted in 1986, GMHC’s guidelines offer informed instructions on safe sex towards readers without shyness or imprecise expression. Hoping to impress upon readers the importance of safe sex, GMHC assures readers that safe sex can also be “fun, exciting-hot, horny-and completely satisfying.” Condoms or other barrier methods of birth control and STI prevention have sometimes been stigmatized or portrayed as unattractive or burdensome, yet the GMHC promises that even with condoms and other forms of protection, “it is absolutely possible to continue having great sex!”

Additionally, GMHC acknowledges that great sex comes in many forms. Though this column’s title, “Safer Sex Guidelines for Gay Men (& Everyone),” seems to include persons not fitting the description of “gay men” as an afterthought, the column’s content provides a range of safe sex practices for partners of multiple genders. Safe sex should be employed by “everyone” and in every sexual encounter, unless you are a member of a couple that has been “exclusively sexually monogamous since 1978.”

DISPROVEN myths

First, the column article dispels myths surrounding the transmission of AIDS and HIV, one of the most devastating myths being that only gay men contract HIV. The GMHC states that “Anyone who is sexually active is at risk of exposure to the AIDS virus.” Additionally, it only takes one sexual partner carrying the virus to infect his or her lover, so reducing one’s number of sexual partners does not guarantee safety from its transmission. The article then lists that AIDS can be transmitted “through the exchange of certain bodily fluids,” but not through hugging, kissing, or sharing bathrooms or kitchens. Frottage (rubbing against another person’s clothed body), cuddling, showering together, massaging, and mutual masturbation are similarly not considered to be modes of transmission, and are safe forms of contact.

However, the exchange of cum and pre-cum should be avoided during oral sex and sexual intercourse. A condom should always be worn during vaginal and anal sex, and should only be used with water-soluble lubricants such as KY jelly. For instance, Vaseline is a petroleum-based jelly that will degrade a latex condom and render it ineffective, thus it should not be used.

At the time, using spermicidal jelly containing Nonoxydol-9 was also encouraged by some experts. Now, spermicide usage is heavily encouraged. Spermicides kill sperm specimens and now are often manufactured with the lubricant on condoms nowadays. Sometimes, separately-sold lubricants contain spermicide in them, however this is not always the case. One can find spermicides at drug stores in the United States and apply them to condoms. Spermicides do not protect against sexually transmitted infections.

The following are some of the specific instructions given for activities one might engage in during sex:

“…avoid putting the head of the penis into your mouth.

…never allow anyone to ejaculate in your mouth.

…withdrawing before ejaculation, even with a condom, is safest, since a condom can break.

Fisting is dangerous!

…and carries the risk of AIDS transmission through the exchange of blood. If you do it, always use a rubber glove.

-if you are bisexual, avoid contact with menstrual flow. Use a condom.

Oral contact with fecal material (rimming) should be avoided to reduce the risk of other sexually transmitted diseases. One should use a condom, finger cot or rubber glove if giving a rectal massage. Avoid oral contact with fingers after this.”

do the guidelines give sound guidance?

Though this information is decades old, it is not entirely inaccurate. We now know that HIV (human deficiency virus) is contracted first before AIDS is able to develop in the body, which the GMHC guidelines were intermittently expressive of. The known modes of transmission of HIV/AIDS and other types of STDs is through exposure to infected blood, semen, pre-seminal fluid, rectal fluids, breastmilk, and vaginal secretion. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), these fluids must come in direct contact with a mucous membrane, such as those found in the rectum, vagina, penis, and mouth. Infected fluids that are injected directly into the bloodstream, or come into contact with damaged tissue or open wounds can also transmit the HIV virus.

GMHC was correct in stating that saliva alone does not have the potential to infect people with the HIV virus. Saliva has to be mixed with the blood of an HIV positive partner for transmission to occur during kissing or other oral activities. Even oral sex is not considered to be a high-risk activity for HIV transmission. The CDC acknowledges that oral sex (putting one’s mouth on the penis, vagina, or anus) could transmit the HIV virus, but generally there is “little to no risk of getting HIV from oral sex” (CDC). If oral ulcers, bleeding gums, genital sores, or other sexually transmitted diseases (which may or may not be visible) are present in the mouth, then the risk of HIV transmission through oral sex will increase. Though seminal ejaculation of an HIV-positive person into another’s mouth could technically transmit the virus, this is an “extremely rare” occurrence according to the CDC.

The GMHC stressed that oral sex performed on a penis was dangerous, and asserted that one should “never” let someone ejaculate into one’s mouth. Now, the paranoia surrounding oral sex and HIV transmission has quieted due to increased scientific knowledge. GMHC’s guidelines are still valuable, however, because they show the state of knowledge at the time of their release and the focal points of HIV protection among the queer community written for the queer community.

GMHC was correct in stating that “oral contact with fecal material (rimming) should be avoided” due to the probability of contracting other sexually transmitted diseases. The CDC states that if feces enters one’s mouth during anilingus, rimming, or oral sex on the anus, one can contract hepatitis A, hepatitis B, parasites such as Giardia, or bacteria such as Salmonella or E. coli.

Still, we now know the main activities that often spread HIV. Vaginal or anal sex with an HIV positive partner without a condom or the consumption of HIV preventative or treatment medication is one such activity that spreads HIV most often in the United States. Receptive anal sex, or bottoming, is considered by the CDC to be the highest-risk behavior for an HIV negative person. However, topping, or insertive anal sex, may also transmit the virus. Partners engaging in vaginal sex are less likely to get HIV than if they engaged in anal sex. The sharing of equipment (such as needles, rinse water, or syringes) used to inject drugs with someone who is HIV positive is another risky behavior associated with the transmission of HIV in the United States.

The GMHC also claimed the following:

“-Poppers (inhalents) have been linked to Kaposi’s sarcoma, a cancer associated with AIDS. DON’T USE POPPERS.”

Poppers create a “high” or euphoric feeling in consumers, while also relaxing the throat and anal muscles. In the 1980’s, poppers were popularly used during sex in the gay community, and still are used today. Poppers have not been found to lead to the development of Kaposi’s sarcoma with significant scientific consensus, however, likewise stated by the GMHC, alcohol and drugs can impair a person’s judgement. According to the CDC, alcohol consumption as well as the use of drugs such as GHB, ecstasy, and poppers, lower one’s inhibitions and impair one’s ability to make informed, safe decisions regarding sex and other drug use. While poppers do not cause Kaposi’s sarcoma, they might cause users to engage in unsafe sex, which could lead to their contraction of an STD like HIV/AIDS.

then vs. now

The CDC’s informational page on HIV transmission was last updated on June 6th, 2017. Today is October 20th, 2017. GMHC’s guidelines appear to have been released in 1986, given the copyright date found at the bottom of the article. Scientific research has expanded and improved remarkably since 1986, so one knows that the credibility of the CDC has also risen with time.

The following video gives an overview of the current information known about HIV/AIDS, prevention and protection against HIV/AIDS, as well as how to live with them.

Even though some parts of the GMHC’s guidelines are incorrect, they still promote accurate methods of engaging in safe sex. Information about HIV transmission was not predominantly incorrect or misleading, which shows that these guidelines would have been trustworthy then, and to an extent, even now.