After allegedly contracting the herpes virus from a woman who he had sex with, Oregon man Cyrus Sullivan created a website which essentially, "outs," those who have STDs.
"If we know you will," reads the poorly edited home page of Sullivan's site, a disorganized mess of red, white, and blue. Clicking upon the, "STD Carriers," link takes you to a relatively short list of alleged carriers of a variety of STDs, organized by name, city, state, gender, ethnicity, and type of STD. You may obtain additional details about the alleged, "STD Carriers," including full names and ages, as well as height, weight, hair and eye color, MySpace links, even photographs.
Although some people may support this jackass' site, I think that it is clear to most that this type of STD reporting system is heavily flawed and largely inaccurate at best. Submissions are completely unchecked and unverified, allowing for copious amounts of false accusations. Anyone can report anything, with little chance of being called out for incorrect claims. While Sullivan does encourage those who are falsely accused to submit private medical records showing otherwise, the site stresses how common false negatives are, and entirely disregards the fact that most people probably do not want this prick viewing their intimate medical reports.
Many of the reports contained within this, "database," are based upon Wikipedia entries for porn stars, while others are derived from news reports of rapists or child molesters. Other submissions are riddled with unproven accusations of cheating and promiscuity, and some contain damaging reports of behavior completely unrelated to sex or STDs. One such entry (which I strongly suspect is that of the woman who triggered Sullivan to create this dreadful waste of space) reads that in addition to supposedly having genital herpes, the woman "...also contributed to the structural damage of a wooden framed futon that collapsed 2 weeks later with 3 very heavy people sitting on it." Hardly something which is even remotely relevant to carrying an STD, or representative of a calm, unbiased source.
Personally, I find these sort of sites disgusting. They are not useful for anything, as the listings are relatively few and the accusations completely unchecked. Anyone could say anything, and it would be difficult to refute. It seems as though only spurned exes and jealous peers of the poorest character would take the time to submit anything to this site, be it accurate information or not. Posting full names, photographs, MySpace links, and locations is incredibly dangerous, opening up these people to the possibility of all sorts of dangerous harassment. The fact that many of the entries include details about cheating and one-night stands, as well as other entirely irrelevant, yet negative information, leads me to believe that a great deal of the entries were submitted in vengeance, which hardly makes for a trustworthy account. I also find it completely reprehensible that these unverified accusations are made without any personal accountability. Using protection would circumvent nearly all of the alleged issues that are reported to this web site.
Wrap it before you tap it, mkay, kids? (Psst...it will help you last a bit longer, too, so that that drunk chick won't make fun of your lack of sexual prowess to her friends the next day, leading you to submit a false, rage-filled report about the woman.)
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Meet Cyrus Sullivan. He did not use a condom while engaged in drunken sexual intercourse, and now he is mad..
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/10243
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
kinda funny, but in a wrong way. even if the entries on the website are true, its still no ones business as to who has an STD. if this guy is so mad he should have been more responcible, and so should the woman that he was with.
"its still no ones business as to who has an STD"
There are privacy and legal issues involved in addition to honesty. Consenting adults can make their own choices and bear responsibility for them. However, I would consider one's STD/STI status to be of interest to one's partner, former partner, or potential partner, for their health and safety, as well as any of those people's partners and future partners. It's a public health issue. It's about informed consent.
This is not the best way, or even an effective way, to get "informed consent" for all the reasons the OP listed. People have to be responsible when having sex. They need to use protection every single time. They can't rely on their partner's testimony as proof that they're STD-free. Not only do people lie sometimes, but most people don't know they have an STD. Likewise, one can't assume that oneself doesn't have an STD. Many STDs have no noticeable symptoms. Before having sex with someone, go together to get tested, even if you "know" you're clean. That's how you get real informed consent. If it's not possible to get tested first (like if this is a one-night stand sort of thing), then at least use protection. If the other person doesn't want to use protection, then walk away.
"This is not the best way, or even an effective way, to get "informed consent" for all the reasons the OP listed."
I was not indicating any approval of anonymously accusing or even deliberately attacking someone's character or making false accusations.
I was responding to the specific comment "its still no ones business as to who has an STD"
It certainly is the business of some people if someone is carrying an STD/STI. For example, their partners, former partners, potential partners, and future partners. And any of their partners, former partners, and future partners, and so on and so on, because that is how STDs/STIs spread. Hence, a public health issue.
The rest of your post I agree with. I'm the one who "liked" it. However, one cannot always expect people to behave "responsibly." There will not be 100% adherence to use of condoms or other barrier methods to prevent transmission of STDs/STIs. It's why they're still around, some of them thousands of years after they first appeared in human history.
For example, maybe well educated women in committed same sex relationships consistently use dental dams when engaging in oral sex, to keep themselves and each other as safe as they can. How often do heterosexual couples, even in committed relationships, use dental dams for oral sex on the woman? Do people carry around packs of dental dams on dates or "just in case" the way some people carry condoms? The only place I can be sure to find dental dams is online. Or a resourceful person could e.g., cut open a pair of vinyl surgical gloves in an effort to prevent transmission. Even anecdotally, how often do you hear people doing this? Yes, people who use condoms understand STDs/STIs may be transmitted to or from a penis. Do they understand the same thing about the vulva or anus and act accordingly?
How often do couples go in for regular screenings? How often do people happily oblige when a cute guy/woman expressing interest at the bar or on a date ask them their STD/STI status, or proof of it? How often do you do the asking and feel comfortable doing so? No, men and women continue to pass STDs/STIs between and among themselves and others, because even well informed and otherwise "responsible" people don't always do what they think is "best."
Note: though I have never been part of the culture, I am not against casual, friendship, or for fun sex between consenting partners. It should just be an informed choice and risk.
Where I come from, to even have cause to suspect that one has HIV (say, from having multiple sexual partners and no protection) and then continue to have unprotected sex without informing a partner of the risk, is a crime. Informed consent should definitely be the way, but this guy's response is also definitely unacceptable (shouting it out to the world, having no proof/basis for the accusations, etc).
Yeah, I would say that the person has a right to know, but at the same time, that doesn't mean that so does everyone else who won't be sleeping with them.
If they don't tell their partner and the partner contracts the STD, they should be able to press charges, some misdemeanor minor assault or something. But that doesn't mean ANYONE has a right to know besides the person's intimate partner.
This comment applies to beka too. While I'm inclined to agree that knowingly infecting someone with an STD is despicable, I think it would be extremely difficult to convict the one who infected the other person. To be absolved of any responsibility in the matter, the person who became infected would have to have absolutely no knowledge of STD transmission or protection. There are probably very few, if any, adults with the ability to consent to sex that have never heard of STDs, how they can be transmitted, and how you can protect yourself from them.
So maybe there could be an extra penalty for rapists who knowingly infect their victims with an STD. But I don't think the same could go for two consenting adults.
I'm sorry, but I can't help but wonder if a drunk girl had forgot to ask a guy to use protection and caught an STD if your opinion would be the same.
Absolutely, my opinion would not change a bit.
Using protection is both partner's responsibility. If you fail to use protection, and subsequently contract an STD, it is just as much your fault as it is the person who failed to inform you. People need to take responsibility for their own failings. I believe those who knowingly have an STD should be forthcoming about it, however, it is still the other partner's responsibility to look out for themselves.
The biggest issue with this site is simply that nothing is verified. It's all hearsay, and has the potential to be extremely dangerous and/or damaging.
redredrose,
Why wouldnt the guy already be using protection? Why does she even have to ask? It should be automatic.
I also dont understand how he could forget to use a condom during sex. I've been raging drunk before and still knew that if I was getting it on with anyone that I should use a condom. I think he conveneiently forgot to use a condom, rather than truly forgetting to use one.
False accusations on the web constitute libel. Malice adds to the damages. Absence of malice is only a defense where the person is a public figure. A public figure is usually someone involved in politics. Sounds like this website wouldn't pass. Therefore, people falsely named can sue for damages. And the damages can be copious.
I started this site because like I said she had sex with me and did not tell me of her condition which she had pre-existing knowledge of. Since protection cannot entirely eliminate the risk the responsibility is on the infected person to tell their partner mkay, kids, but I don’t need a condom to last longer baby just to avoid giving you Herpes now god damnit. Because there are people that knowingly put others at risk without their knowledge there needs to be a way to warn others about such people. Some believe that it is bad for people that are not sexually involved with someone to know their STD status. I disagree, since people with STD's like me have an obligation to tell their partners, what is the harm of people who are not partners and thus not at risk knowing? Since having any STD in and of itself does not indicate anything negative about that person's character. This brings me to stigma that people with STD's face that would not exist if were not for jerks that discriminate against people for things that they cannot change. Someone who makes fun of someone just for having a STD is no different than someone who sees a same sex couple holding hands and shouts "faggots".
I understand the concern about people being falsely reported which is why my database captures the I.P. address along with exact date and time used for each report. In the case that I receive proof of a false listing the victim will receive the information necessary to find out who lied about them. With so many sites where lies can be posted mine is not needed for someone to get smeared, but if someone does it on mine they will be caught. When I catch someone they will be the first listing on the eventual to be perpetrators page which will create a permanent record of that persons lie. People wrongfully listed can get a permanent record or being clean on a specific date. The question has been asked why give this "prick" medical test records? I ask, if the records say there is nothing wrong with you why not give them to everyone? In the case of a false claim it is not my site that commits libel, but the person who makes the report who agrees in order to fill out the form to tell the truth and be held liable for their submission. I ask you, if you were wrongfully listed what would you want to know more, who lied about you or where they did it? I look forward to the day when I help someone either avoid a STD or nail and ex-boy/girlfriend for making up something awful.
Because so many people have responded constructively to this article I invite all of you including the author to voice your opinion on my blog stdcarries.blogspot.com. I have created this blog with sections designed for people to post their opinion about the site, comment on any person listed (this can give someone listed a venue to refute the claims about them and help get the ball rolling if info is false to find who’s responsible), and to share any STD related stories. All stories are subject to approval and all comments positive or negative will be approved unless they contain excessive profanity (ex: I f*cking hate your f*cking site), advertising (ex: check out this other website), threats (ex: take the site down or I will chop off your balls), or is irrelevant to the topic (ex: Jack and Jill fell down the hill). This blog is intended for constructive discussion.
The policy for handling complaint has also been improved. Under the old policy anyone wrongfully listed would have to make a complaint and wait for the site to receive clean test results for any change to be made to the information in the database. Now whenever a complaint is made by someone claiming to be wrongfully listed the following will be added to the profile in question:
*Administrator note: This person or someone claiming to be this person has contacted www.stdcarrirs.com and stated that all or some of the information listed is not true. As a result this profile is under investigation. Comments about this profile (if any) can be found at http://stdcarriers.blogspot.com.
About the futon thing, it's a funny story. One night we were making out with her on top of me. All of a sudden we heard a loud pop and laughed about it. The next day I found a crack in the part of the frame that goes in the front across the seating are.
It worked fine after that, but a 6'6" 260lb friend of mine brought over 2 girls he met at the bar that were as heavy or heavier than him. We were sitting around drinking beers when all of a sudden the entire futon collapsed beneath them. It was one of the funniest things I have ever seen.
Basically my ex-girlfriend weakened it and they put it out of commission.
So how does that have anything to do with STDs / STIs? It just makes you sound like a vengeful and petty ex.
So how do we know if this guy didn't have the STD before sex with this girl? Was this his first unprotected sex encounter?
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_110408_news_STD_website_creator_criminal_past.17cb5ddfb.html
According to the ====Sullivan has a prior criminal record involving a “sex offender prank” he pulled while attending OSU.
In April 2005 Sullivan was arrested for forging documents sent to hundreds of OSU students alleging that a former member of the Tau Kappa Epsilon fraternity was a sex offender===
====Sullivan pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of harassment relating to the falsely advertised STD clinics, after he claims his attorney told the court the fliers were pranks.===
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_110408_news_STD_website_creator_criminal_past.17cb5ddfb.html