Procedure

Young men were recruited from public venues (e.g., bars, clubs, street corners, and special events) using a stratified probability sampling design (MacKellar, Valleroy, Karon, Lemp, & Janssen, 1996; Muhib et al., 2001). Additional descriptions of the sampling procedures and methodologies are described elsewhere (Ford et al., 2009; M.D. Kipke et al., 2007).

Young men were eligible to participate if they were: 18- to 24-years old; self-identified as gay, bisexual, or uncertain of their sexual orientation and/or reported having had sex with a man; self-identified as Caucasian, African American, or Latino of Mexican descent; and a resident of Los Angeles County and anticipated living in Los Angeles for at least six months.

HYM participants completed an extensive 1 to 1 ½-hour survey every six months over the course of two years. The surveys were administered in both English and Spanish, using audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (ACASI) technologies and an on-line testing format. ACASI technologies have been found to improve both the quality of the data collected and the validity of subjects’ responses, particularly to questions of a sensitive nature, such as drug use and sexual behavior (Kissinger et al., 1999; Ross, Tikkanen, & Mansoon, 2000; Turner et al., 1998).

In addition to the longitudinal quantitative study, a targeted group of 24 participants was chosen from the HYM cohort for semi-structured qualitative interviews, as one of several qualitative sub-studies in the HYM Study. This sub-study was designed to gather greater depth of information related to sexual behavior. Domains explored in this sub-study included: relationship experiences and ideals, sexual preferences and perspectives, and sexual behavior.

Qualitative interviews were completed between October 2006 and January 2007. Individuals were selected based on responses to key items in the Wave 2 survey. Specifically, we identified those who reported inconsistent condom use (n = 143) and those who “never” used a condom (n = 81) during receptive or insertive anal intercourse in the last three months. We then randomly selected 12 participants (stratified equally across the three ethnic/racial groups) from each both groups, for a total of n = 24 qualitative respondents. These criteria were selected to ensure that all participants had recently engaged in UAI; individual differences in condom use were selected as a criterion to understand how and in what situations YMSM may choose not to use a condom. The sample size for this qualitative study was based on our estimates of when we would reach theoretical saturation. Twenty-four qualitative interviews were conducted, but one was removed from analysis due to inconsistencies in response; therefore, a total of 23 interviews were analyzed for this discussion.

The Internet as a Learning Environment

Participants described accessing the Internet for a variety of reasons, most commonly to seek information and advice about gay-related issues. They described a variety of web-based resources for information and advice relating to their sexuality that included chat rooms, pornography, and web-based search engines. Chat rooms, which were interactive in nature and offered more personalized information, were described as the most popular Internet spaces. Many also reported using general interest search engines (e.g., Google, Yahoo) to learn about gay sexuality. Participants often reported that if they currently had a question about sex or STIs, the first place they would go is the Internet.

The kind of advice participants sought varied from general information about sexuality to more intimate advice about gay relationships. Several participants mentioned that they began to go online for advice when they were first “discovering” their own sexuality, as they did not feel they had anywhere else to go for the kind of information they needed. For all of these participants, the Internet was a trustworthy and safe venue to explore and have their questions answered.

Chat rooms on sites such as AOL and Yahoo were mentioned most frequently as the sites young men used when they first began to go online. This was often due to a lack of knowledge about gay specific sites: “It was like AOL, like gay chat rooms. I didn’t know about gay sites or anything like that.” In some cases, the use of these chat rooms was described as the obvious venue for learning about gay sexuality and exploring their own sexual identities. Several young men described using general chat rooms, and then later learning about and moving on to gay specific sites, either through conversations with other men or from advertisements placed on the webpage.

Chat rooms were a popular venue, allowing young men to meet new people, find sexual partners, and to learn about gay sexuality. In most cases, participants described an ongoing and passive learning process by which they listened and learned as conversations in the chat rooms unfolded. Many participants began accessing chat rooms at a young age, where they were exposed to sexual terminology, but did not necessarily acquire detailed information about the specifics, benefits and/or risks associated with those acts. For example, one respondent explained how he first heard the terms “top” and “bottom” in a chat room, but did not fully understand their meaning until he actually engaged in anal intercourse.

People in chat rooms mentioning things. So many things went over my head about, oh, what was it, for the longest time, I thought topping and bottoming meant when you had sex, who was on top and who was on bottom.

In several instances, chat rooms were also described as a place to meet other gay men who could become friends or mentors. One respondent described meeting his “older gay brother” in an online chat room. This person was someone whom he had never met in person, but on whom he relied to provide guidance on questions about gay sex and relationships.

In the absence of more traditional sources of information about sexuality and the mechanics of sex, such as school, friends, and family members, pornography available through the Internet often provided the first glimpse of gay sexuality. Several participants mentioned that pornography was where they first learned and saw anal intercourse: “I eventually figured out what anal sex was when it came to the Internet.” For the following respondent, pornography on the Internet helped him not only to understand the mechanics of sex, but to identify and understand his same-sex attractions.

I: And were there any other places you remember learning about same sex sexuality?

R: Well, I guess you could say the Internet…like porn sites. And then I looked up, I was curious about what I was in middle school, so I would look it up…I’d look up like man like, men liking men or something like that. Because then that word was sort of a taboo growing up. [Which word?] Homosexual or gay, those words were not used in my middle school or elementary school…So I just, I didn’t know what it was so I didn’t know what I was. So I looked it up.

Assessing Partners and Risk when Using the Internet as a Venue for Meeting Sexual Partners

While young men typically described their use of the Internet as beginning with a desire to learn more about sex and sexuality, they also shared how this medium provided a readily available venue to meet other young men for possible sexual relationships. Participants met, evaluated and assessed the potential risks and often got to know people they met online using a variety of web-based platforms, including personal profiles in virtual communities, email, and instant messaging. The length of online interactions varied greatly, and could last only a few minutes or involve weeks of regular contact with an individual before an in-person meeting. The length of the interaction typically corresponded with the individual’s intentions regarding the relationship. Specifically, those looking for a “hook-up” or casual sexual encounter engaged in a short amount of chatting, while those seeking longer-term relationships or friendships engaged in more extensive chats. One respondent described an online friendship that lasted several years, eventually leading to an in-person meeting.

For many participants, the starting place for online encounters was to view an individual’s profile, sometimes by using the website’s search tool to search for criteria such as ethnicity, zip code or age. Profiles often included photos and a description of the person’s characteristics, such as their interests, body type, age, ethnicity, sexual preferences, and/or HIV status. Interestingly, participants did not initially mention HIV status as something that they noticed in a potential partner’s profile. One of the first things most participants looked for was an appealing picture. Participants viewed photos to evaluate overall attractiveness, as well as such characteristics as body type, fitness level, or personal style (e.g., “whether they’re a punker or a surfer”). This step was viewed as so natural and taken for granted that one respondent explained that not looking at a picture before meeting the partner would be “weird.”

In spite of the popularity of photos, nearly all of these young men also emphasized that an individual’s “personality” was more important to them, typically stating that a person’s looks were only a starting place for determining whether they were worth chatting with. Participants could get a sense of an individual’s personality by reading their profile to identify common interests, such as shared musical tastes or career goals. Some young men especially liked profiles that conveyed an appealing personality by including such items as poems, humor, or other additions that indicated an individual’s unique characteristics.

The first thing that attracts me is the picture…Just if they look nice, then yeah I’ll stop at the page. But if the page is bland or doesn’t really have anything on it, I’m not gonna say anything. But if it has something catchy on there, like on their profile that they might say, a lot of personality; maybe they wrote a poem, a really nice poem…Not a poem that they found on the Internet, but a real poem that they wrote.

Starting to chat with a person usually involved sending an instant message or an email to the person they wished to meet. However, a few participants said that they never initiated a chat with anyone, but that they preferred instead to “be hit up” by an individual who was interested in them based on their profile. By engaging in small talk and asking certain basic questions, a respondent could decide whether he felt interested or comfortable enough to continue the chat. For many of these young men, the most important phase of the process was the evaluation of the person that occurred while they were chatting. The key factor for many was whether they and the other person shared certain common interests or had “a lot to talk about.”

Small talk also helped them assess the potential risks associated with a potential sex partner. In fact, young men often spoke of risks related to HIV being associated with how well they knew and trusted a partner. This demonstrated that trust and the importance of that relationship may be more important than the risks associated with HIV transmission. Specifically, when asked to describe sexual experiences they felt were “low-risk,” the common feature attached to each of those scenarios was a sense of “knowing their partner”–regardless of whether they engaged in UAI or not. The length of time needed to “know” their partners varied from a week or two to several years. Interestingly, participants seemed confident in their abilities to reach this level of trust and knowing, as Jamie describes here: “I had known him well enough to know that he wasn’t really high risk. Or at least I assumed that he wasn’t high risk.” Meeting an online partner was perceived as “risky” if there was not some kind of exchange of personal information; for some participants, even the most “minimal exchanges” made them feel safer in a potential meeting.

Many participants stated that there were certain basic topics typically addressed during an online chat, particularly if they were considering whether to have sex with someone. These might include finding out the potential partner’s location–particularly for those seeking a one-time hook-up–or asking questions that would help the respondent evaluate how risky sex with that particular partner might be, such as their HIV status and whether they have been tested recently. Some participants reported feeling more comfortable asking such personal questions online rather than in person. Several participants stated that while chatting they also engaged in flirtation, giving compliments, and what one young man described as “sexual foreshadowing,” which for him meant attempting to arouse a potential partner by talking about his body or different sexual activities. Sexual preferences were of particular importance for young men to discuss prior to meeting–regardless of whether he was searching for a single hook-up or a longer term relationship: “You definitely wanna cover those bases because two people of the same orientation, what good would they do…Like two tops or two bottoms or whatever.” Some also mentioned lying about their age to potential sex partners, stating they were older or younger based on what they thought would make them most attractive.

Intent in Using Online Resources

Participants in this sample were split in their ultimate desires related to going into gay chat rooms, with most (18 of the 23) seeking a longer-term relationship of dating or possibly friendship, and a smaller proportion seeking single encounters or other relationships based solely on sex. Many of the participants who were seeking more than just a sexual hook-up expressed frustration that people online were only interested in meeting up for sex. These young men typically disliked partners who brought up the topic of sex too soon or with too little discussion of other things that could help them feel more comfortable, such as career interests, or how the respondent was doing overall:

If a person right off the bat is talkin’ about sex or whatever, it’s a little less attractive. Whereas if a person wants to know “Are you in school? Do you work? What are your hobbies?” That’s a little bit more attractive because you find that person is geared toward what you want and what you’re looking for.

For many of these young men, an online chat or relationship generally lasted several weeks before an in-person meeting. This time allowed the respondent time to get to know someone better before meeting in person–a meeting that typically occurred in a public such as a coffee shop or club.

Those seeking purely a sexual relationship also tended to dislike individuals who jumped directly to the topic of sex. For example, Sergio described this as a “test” for a partner to demonstrate an interest in something more than a purely sexual interaction. He related an incident where he met another young man at a hotel after chatting with him online one night:

He was like “Let me call you” and I was like “Oh, alright.” So we talked and he didn’t have a threatening voice, he was very gentle with the way he was talking. And he just kind of talked to me about work. We didn’t go into sex at all. I was like “Okay, passing the test…” And then he asked me what I’m into …I was just like “Well, I’m a bottom.” And he said, “Good, I’m a top.” I’m like “That’s awesome.” So he was like “Well, if you have time tonight, do you wanna chill, let me know.”

In contrast to the majority of participants, a few young men preferred to engage in a minimum of small talk, such as Emmet, who stated: “you’re online, you know what you’re there for. You’re not there to be meeting poker buddies.” These participants were specifically interested in having sex, and sometimes expressed impatience or frustration about people who wanted to have long conversations online. “You make the small talk and then it’s just like, okay get to the point. You know what we both want, like stop the bullshit.” For young men fitting this description, online interactions were minimal and an in-person meeting typically took place within hours of the initial contact in a private home or hotel. These interactions were typically single encounter relationships; however, Lane described an ongoing but casual relationship with another young man (“Blowjob Betty”) with whom he only engaged as a recipient of oral sex. The parameters of the relationship were what seemed to attract him the most, and he reported engaging in very little small talk prior to or throughout their relationship.

Honestly, I like how like clean and defined the relationship is, I usually do try to have a thing, something to do right afterwards because I don’t really want to, I don’t really want to be building any more of a relationship with him at all. And I don’t want it to get messy. And I am fine keeping it as it is now…just like a blow job and that’s all.

In general, participants reported that outside of clubs or bars, there are few options for YMSM to find partners and the Internet represents a new and more novel venue. Participants discussed both the positive and negative aspects to finding partners on the Internet. While many of the participants mentioned the Internet as their “favorite” way to meet people, those stating this preference still tended to describe negative aspects of the process as well.

Negatives of Seeking Partners Online

Participants described the negative aspects of finding partners online, such as potential dangers to their physical health and safety as well as the ability for individuals to misrepresent themselves physically. For some participants, these negative aspects of online partners far outweighed the benefits, particularly as they got older and were able to access gay populations in other venues. Among other negative aspects described by young men was the limitation of on-line communication that did not include body language or other communication cues and the overarching perception that men online were only interested in casual sex.

The project described was supported by Grant Number R01DA015638 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute on Drug Abuse or the National Institutes of Health. The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of the many staff members and project interns who contributed to collection, management, analysis, and review of this data: Cesar Arauz-Cuadra, Marianne Burns, Judith Grout, Donna Lopez, Miles McNeeley, Marcia Reyes, Katherine Riberal, Talia Rubin, Conor Schaye, Maral Shahanian, Meghan Treese, Carolyn F. Wong, and Joseph Zhou. The authors would also like to acknowledge the insightful and practical commentary of the members of The Community Advisory Board: Asian Pacific AIDS Intervention Team (Noel Alumit), LA County Dept of Health Services (Chi-Wai Au), Los Angeles Black Pride (Ivan Daniels III), AIDS Project Los Angeles (Ray Fernandez), Youth/Trent Jackson Media Group (Trent Jackson), LA Gay and Lesbian Center (Dustin Kerrone), Division of Adolescent Medicine, CHLA (Miguel Martinez), West Coast Ballroom Scene (Ariel Prodigy), West Coast Ballroom Scene (Brion Ramses), City of LA AIDS Coordinator’s Office (Ricki Rosales), Minority AIDS Project (Haquami Sharpe), Bienestar (Pedro Garcia), St. Mary's Medical Center Long Beach (Carlos Ruiz), IN Magazine (Ramy Eletreby), Minority AIDS Project (Kevin Williams), Minority AIDS Project (Rev. Charles E. Bowen), UCLA Integrated Substance Abuse Programs (Tom Freese).

Information and Attitudes about Sex and Sexuality

Now, I want to know about where you first learned about sex and sexuality and what kinds of things you learned when you were growing up.

• ○ Where/from whom did you receive your information on sex when you were growing up? (probe for school, friends) What kinds of things did you learn? (probe: for STDs, birth control, safer sex, anal intercourse). What kinds of things do you think should be taught in sex education in schools? (Be sure to ask about whether gay sex was covered)
• ○ Who and where do you go to NOW for information on sex (e.g., STDs, safer sex, different kinds of sex)? What kinds of things do you learn from this person/place? Why do you choose this person or place for information?
• ○ Are there issues relating to sex or sexuality that you want to learn more about but are not sure where to go to find out?

Sexual Partners

Now, I want to ask you some questions on how you choose your sexual partners. First of all, where do you meet sexual or romantic partners? (probes: bars/clubs, friends, work, internet)? Currently, how do you meet partners most often? What is your favorite way to try to meet a sexual or romantic partner? What makes this the best way for you to meet a partner? [If meet on internet, probe for information on what they “chat” about before meeting in person; what attracts them to someone online; are there any differences with the sexual partners you meet online vs. in other places e.g., bars, clubs, parties, friends, etc]. What kinds of things do you look for in a sexual partner? Thinking about your last partners, what kinds of things initially attracted you to them?