The U.S has come a long way from the days in which homosexuality was, more or less, a societal taboo. Presently, homosexual marriage is legal across the nation and gay pride flags are in numerous cities. This progress displays how the movements by homosexuals have shifted public opinion. As these movements were occurring, a major obstacle for this group was, and to a degree still is, the myth that there is something inherent to homosexuality that increases the risk of HIV/Aids. The truth is that it is unprotected anal intercourse, not homosexuality that increases risk.
Therefore, with this understanding, the closing of bathhouses was the correct action. A bathhouse is a commercial space where homosexual men go and have sex. To decrease the risk of unprotected anal sex and preserve chastity, the closing of bathhouses was necessary. Educational programs that cover the topic of HIV/Aids are a necessary part of our public policy (National Conference of Catholic Bishops, 395). However, this topic is only briefly covered in schools and there aren’t high amounts of programs available for those not in school to attend. (Moorhead, 2015). Moreover, in these classes, the instructors must cover the topic of chastity. Teaching chastity, while making a person aware of the importance of practicing safe sex, informs the individual on moral obligations.
Although chastity has religious connections, I speak of it as an ideology that even the non-religious can and should follow because it calls for humans to respect each other. Chastity calls on us to respect other people’s values and them as human beings (National Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1989, pg. 395). Therefore, a person that does not want to increase their sexual partners’ risk for HIV/Aids is inclined to have safe sex so that their morality is preserved. Bathhouses increase the challenge of being moral by exposing a person to an environment in which they may make immoral decisions like unprotected sex.
127 our experts are availableright now
Homosexuals are human beings; therefore, they are emotional beings and as emotional beings, they will often base their decisions on their emotions rather than logic additionally, when hormones start rushing the best decisions aren’t always chosen, especially when at risk of being influenced by others. Bathhouses have one purpose, to serve as a safe space where homosexual men can have sex at. Consequently, the men that went to them had that one intention.
Homosexual men are not at risk of pregnancy and if they’re uneducated about the risk of unprotected anal sex, they may be likely to succumb to their emotions and engage in unprotected sex. If various men in the bathhouse are engaging in unprotected sex, that increases the chance of the next pair doing the same because of how today’s media promotes the sheep mentality of doing what others are doing (National Conference of Catholic Bishops, 389).
To attend a bathhouse there was no form of screening, you just decided if you wanted to go or not (Cheves, 2015). This means a person with HIV/Aids has to inform whomever they are engaging with that they have HIV/Aids or else the individual will not be aware. Additionally, bathhouses prohibit drugs, but drugs are consumed prior to entering and they are snuck in (Cheves, 2015). Drugs impair judgment; therefore, you’re at risk to engage in risky behavior. Consequently, if bathhouses weren’t closed and continued the same operation then homosexual men would consistently be at risk at that establishment. Moreover, this environment promoted the exploitation of humans because they exploited the fact that numerous people are not aware of the moral values and facts surrounding HIV/Aids. Therefore, some homosexuals may not understand the influence they will be under when they go to a bathhouse or how anal sex can lead to HIV/Aids.
Disagreeing with the operation of bathhouses does not mean a person has to disagree with homosexuality. In fact, they are actually two separate issues. Moreover, in today’s climate where the majority accept homosexuality, spaces like bathhouses aren’t necessary. Today, homosexuals can function, or almost function like heterosexuals. They can go on dates, be openly gay, and marry without the major risk of violence occurring like there once was. Additionally, I disagree with the functionality of spaces like bathhouse that are for heterosexuals as well because of their threat to safety, health, and chastity. It’s an argument of safety and moral responsibility, not sexual orientation. However, there was once a time where bathhouses did play an important role in the lives of homosexuals.
In previous decades, people condemned homosexuality so the majority kept it a secret. Bathhouses became spaces where they could express themselves and freedom of expression is important because it promotes self-confidence and relieves stress. However, the risk was the same, so bathhouses were still a health and moral risk. Additionally, a push for homosexual acceptance should have been the focus the entire time. Nonetheless, eventually acceptance of homosexuality reached the forefront of their human rights movement. Being that the movement has been successful so far, the few benefits of the bathhouse are now irrelevant.
