Monkeypox and "Men who have sex with men"

Two days ago I wrote about Monkeypox, an old disease at new risk of becoming another global pandemic. One thing I did not address in that blog is what Monkeypox is. For those who don't know from current events news and discussions, it's a viral disease (like Coronavirus) that jumped from animals to humans (like Coronavirus) that has a few symptoms like Coronavirus but is especially known for causing a painful, blistering rash (unlike Coronavirus). Also unlike Coronavirus, Monkeypox is spread primarily through skin-to-skin contact. People get infected by having close physical contact with a contagious person, not by merely breathing air in the same room as them.

The contact nature of Monkeypox transmission has led a lot of public health experts and advocates to raise the alarm among gay men's communities. Gay men— or more broadly, "men who have sex with men", as the common messaging goes— are at greatest risk. Indeed, the CDC report I cited on Tuesday notes that 94% of the cases are in men who reported recent male-male sexual activity. BTW, an update from the CDC today increases the estimated number of cases in the US from 7,500 to 10,000. A 33% increase in two days is a clear sign of a growing epidemic.

I am of two minds about the way Monkeypox is being communicated as a risk primarily to gay men. On the one hand, it's helpful to direct public health information at those most at risk. On the other hand, gay sex is already stigmatized by a large minority of the public. Characterizing Monkeypox as a gay men's disease risks further stigmatizing their sexuality and misleading the public about how Monkeypox spreads.

Monkeypox is not an STD. It is a contact disease. It can be spread between any two people of any gender or sexual preference. And of any age. I emphasize age because think about what happens when this disease appears in preschool and elementary school children. Kids play with each other. They hug, they tumble, they roughhouse. Then they hug and kiss their parents. Soon Monkeypox is going to be an everybody problem, not just a "men who have sex with men" problem. The time to take it seriously is now.

Angel Falls (Hiking Covel Creek, part 3)

Our hike up Covel Creek on Saturday took us past numerous waterfalls. Some were unnamed but not that small; then there was Covel Falls, which we could walk behind. Either one of these would be enough for the trail to stand on its own. But wait: there's more.

We continued up the ridge from Covel Falls— and it was steep, up, up, up— and down the other side. The trail curved into a plunging stream canyon. Falls 5-10' high stood above and below. "Is this Angel Falls?" we asked each other. Then we looked through the trees and saw it. It took a bit of bushwhacking and climbing up 10' of rock to get to the real Angel Falls.



This photo (above) doesn't really do Angel Falls justice. The falls looks much taller in person. It's a drop of 60-80' down a moss covered rock wall.



This photo (above) shows a closeup of the upper part of the falls. Here you can better appreciate how all the little rivulets of water combine to make it a sublime sight.

While getting to the falls is (almost) always the highlight of a waterfalls hike, that's not "it". There's usually more to appreciate. Generally it's just a matter of remembering to look up instead of merely putting one foot in front of the other.



That was the case with this tall cliff we descended. The trail went down, down, down surprisingly steep switchbacks. I guess those shouldn't have been surprising given the steep switchbacks we went up, up, up on the other side. But once we descended them we passed below a huge cliff. It seemed like we dropped 1,000' before we got back to the trailhead. Had we really climbed that much to see all the falls? We must have.

In beauty I walk.