The Russian film Tchaikovsky (1971) portrays an unhappy, somewhat unstable composer. His rich patroness loves him, but he cannot return her affection. He marries a young admirer but tries to drown himself the next day. The wealthy patron pays off the young lady to get Tchaikovsky a divorce.
Someone unfamiliar with Tchaikovsky might ask, "Why is this talented man so unhappy? Why is he so self-destructive?"
The film fascinated me because I knew what it left out. I knew what was bothering Tchaikovsky. In a virulently homophobic society, Tchaikovsky loved other men.
There have always been rumors that Tchaikovsky's death was not due to the cholera epidemic sweeping St. Petersburg at that time. Some say he poisoned himself; some say a "Court of Honor" gave Tchaikovsky the choice of suicide or disgrace.
So what's this got to do with polys?
The movie didn't "ring true" to me because it pretended Tchaikovsky was "straight". Several current attitudes about polys and AIDS don't "ring true" -- to me -- either.
First of all is the attitude that polys (or any group) are an "at risk" population for AIDS. It is true that the more people you have sex with, the more chances you have to contract HIV. But that is like saying that the more you drive, the more likely you are to have a traffic accident. Driving by itself does not cause accidents, and sexual acts by themselves do not cause AIDS. AIDS is caused by a virus generally transmitted in body fluids.
We know that condoms cannot prevent the spread of all STDs (not all are passed via the genitals). Nevertheless it seems to me there are ways to be sexual with someone, with extremely little risk of STD transmission; and if this can be done with one partner, it can be done with multiple partners. Whether it's condoms, dental dams, latex gloves, plastic underwear, or whatever.
Teenagers (and some religious conservatives!) are undereducated enough about sex, without people implying 1) that AIDS is "caused" by certain kinds of sexual activity; or even 2) that "anyone who is sexual with someone else" is at risk.
A billboard in our local mall shows 9 women (2 with small children, 1 or 2 more possibly pregnant). The headline asks, "Which of these women should be tested for AIDS?" The answer at the bottom of the billboard: "All of Them".
Why "all of them" (implying "all of us")? What puts "all of them" at risk? Is it that they're all assumed to be sexual with someone else?
If you haven't come in contact with someone else's semen, or vaginal fluid, or blood -- or had a blood transfusion -- do you need an HIV test?
I knew the missing "key" in the Tchaikovsky film. What is the missing "key" here? Paranoia? Mega-Caution? Or is there one?
It seems to me, if surgeons can protect themselves against infection in the operating room, then we can do it in the bedroom.