Gay and Bisexual Men’s Health Survey(Community Assessment)

2010

Collaborators: ASA, CARE, UT Grad, and the Q

Sample Demographics - Age

18 to 2021 to 2425 to 2930 to 4041 to 5556+

N=137

Sample Demographics - Race

Middle Eastern

Pacific Islander

NativeAmericanAsian

Black

Multiracial

Other

White

N=133

Sample Demographics - Ethnicity

HispanicNon-Hispanic

N=128

Sample Demographics – Annual Income

$10K or Below

$10,001 to$25K$25,001 to$35K$35,001 to$45K$45,001 to$80K$80,001+N=136

Sample Demographics - Education

Less than HSHSDSome CollegeBachelor'sMaster'sPhD

N=136

Basic FindingsSexual Risk

Anal sex partners

5 or less – 69% 6 to 10 – 11% 11 to 20 – 10% 21 or more – 9%

Meeting places Online – 51% Friends – 46% Clubs – 40% Organizations- 17%

Preferences Relationships – 74% Friends/Ben – 33% Hookups – 12% No Pref. – 11%

Concern over HIV

Very – 60% Somewhat – 30% Unconcerned – 7%

Condom use Always – 60% Sometimes – 33% Never – 7%

Anonymous partners

Yes – 45% No – 55%

Motivations to use condoms

Fear – 77% Availability – 27% Partner’s des. – 17%

Sensation – 14%

Planning for safer sex

Always – 72% Sometimes – 20% Never – 8%

Had sex with HIV-infected person

Yes – 28% No – 72% 77% of yes used condom

Ever been tested for HIV

Yes – 94% No – 6%

Motivations to get tested

Free Services – 61% Compassion – 54% Anonymity – 44% Club testing – 23%

Basic FindingsSexual Risk (continued)

Talk about HIV status with partner?

Yes – 82% No – 20%

Comfort talking about condom-use during sex?

Yes – 96% No – 4%

Use of drugs during sex

Alcohol – 51% Yes Pot – 24% Yes Poppers – 17% Yes (video head cleaner)

Cocaine – 7% Yes

Influences on Sexual Risk Behavior: What theory said we

should expectInterpersonal Skills

Cultural Differences

Self-esteem

Substance use

1. Good2. Bad

1. No-use2. Use

1. Good2. Bad

1. No Difference2. Difference

HIV Risk Factors (e.g. frequency of condom use, number of anonymous

partners, having ever been tested, comfort negotiating safer sex to partners, etc.)

1. Low-risk2. High-risk

Findings: Sexual Behavior

• In Austin, interpersonal skills, substance abuse and self-esteem to not cause risky behavior.- Younger (<25) have fewer anonymous partners

• Cultural differences based on race do not cause risky behavior.

• Cultural differences based on class (income) do cause risky behavior.- Having ever been tested

Note: We acknowledge that there is some margin of error in our results, because our sample is only close to a probability sample.

Influences on Motivations to Join Gay Community: What theory said we

should expectSocioeconomic

Status

Geographic Location, “gay

ghettos”

Attitudes toward Femininity

Cultural Differences

1. High2. Low

1. No Difference2. Difference

1. Positive2. Negative

1. Close2. Distant

Desire to Join Gay Community

1. Desire to join2. No desire to join

Findings: Motivations to Join Gay Community

• In Austin, cultural differences, attitudes toward male femininity and geographic location do not affect motivations to join.

• Socioeconomic status does affect motivations to join. - Importance of gay identity- Number of straight friends

Connections Between Community and Sexual Behavior

Attitudes toward gay community

Whether one joins the gay

community

1. Positive2. Negative

1. Joins2. Doesn’t Join

Sexual Risk Behavior

1. Low Risk2. High Risk

• The only risk behavior that community involvement influences is number of anonymous partners.• 42% to 55% do not see solidarity in gay community• 55% feel excluded from the gay community

Which levers can we pull to lower incidence of HIV among gay and bi

men?• Low income MSM Testing campaign

- Incentives (gift cards, food vouchers, etc.)- Transportation- Awareness

• Men who don’t want to join gay community Make community more attractive- Raise awareness to increase inclusivity & solidarity though gay community leaders- For those still not interested, go where they are meeting their anonymous partners

Questions??