"There isn't very much available information on this as you know," says Mark Graver of THT. "It is certainly theoretically possible but, with only one documented case, it seems extremely low risk. Let's not distract from the fact that by far the most likely way of contracting HIV is through unprotected anal sex, not least if you do so with many partners or if you assume you're safe since in a long-term relationship."

True, there is only one officially recorded case (NAM AIDS manual; page 113; Grutzmeier, S; Transmission in gay men in Stockholm; 1990-1992; IX International Conference on AIDS, Po C02-2584). But, as NAM AIDS Treatment Update Editor Edwin J Bernard, told OutUK: "There are scant data on the transmission risks of SIE, since I imagine semen in the eye is rarely the only HIV risk when sex is involved."

The same methodological problem, of being unable to isolate the actual cause of transmission amongst several possible causes in any given subject, also puts a question mark over similar empirical study into the risks of oral sex and all its contributing variables - bleeding gums, open sores, pummelled rear throats, the defensive properties of saliva, taking cum or pre-cum into the mouth and actually swallowing. For ethical and practical reasons, you simply can't perform controlled experiments isolating and examining the outcomes of specific potentially risky activities with volunteers! Another complicating factor is the openness and accuracy with which those surveyed recall their sexual activity to doctors and researchers.

So, in the absence of emphatic empirical data, what say the biological facts of transmission?

"I think some work may have been done that is relevant to this," says Gus Cairns, former Editor-in-Chief of Positive Nation. "Corneal exposure [to HIV] would fall into the category of mucous membrane exposure. If so, the work I've seen suggests that in terms of single exposures SIE may be less risky than unprotected receptive anal sex but more risky than unprotected insertive anal sex - per event. But since people fuck a lot more often than getting cum squirted in their eye I still don't think it's a major contributor to transmission. Do I think it's possible? Yes. Do I think it happens often? No. Unless people have a "facial" fetish they're probably running more risk from oral sex which is something that happens a lot more often."

"I don't know of any studies into possible SIE transmission," says Matthew Hodson of GMFA. "Yes, it theoretically could happen. The skin on the underside of the eyelids is a mucous membrane, the kind of skin that can absorb fluids. However the function the mucous membrane serves in the eye is to keep it lubricated, so it's actually going to be moistening the eye rather than absorbing liquid away from the eye. If you get cum in your eye, it'll sting like hell and you'll cry it out. Tears are a part of the body's natural defence system."

Hudson concludes: "You're not the first person to ask me about it though. I think it's helpful if you are addressing men's concerns, but damaging if you are unnecessarily adding to them."

So the general consensus from health advisors seems to be that HIV transmission through SIE is theoretically possible but very low risk. However, given that - like oral transmission - there is extremely little emphatic empirical data, and since expert opinions do vary under scrutiny, then - without being alarmist - it's still a case of "tryer beware", not least if you're out every night begging different guys to cum over your face, up your nose and in your eyes. And perhaps safe sex literature should have something to say about it to address more general concerns even if it's just something to be aware of rather than lose much sleep over.

The choice, ultimately, is as ever yours. And don't let any amount of spunk in your eyes blind you to the fact it's far more important, indisputably, to always use a condom when fucking.

Back