On white covid-cautious-queers

And why I don't fuck with them

I am white. I take precautions to avoid covid. I am queer. So you’d think I’d fit in with this group, but I sure as hell don’t. I’m mad, and I’ve been mad about it for a long time, so this essay is gonna be a ranting one. I’m not writing in my usual nuance.¹ Take it or leave it.

---

So lemme back up.

From the start of the covid-19 pandemic, I’ve been taking precautions to avoid catching or transmitting the virus. I’m disabled and chronically ill, and my doctor said I was high risk for long term complications from a covid infection, so that was instantly personally motivating. But I also generally cared for others, particularly those who back then we called “essential workers,” or folks who didn’t get to choose to stay home to avoid risky situations. I was taking precautions for their sake, too, especially back when we didn’t have N95s or vaccines. Back then, the risk of being near someone was so much greater because we didn’t have good options to protect ourselves as individuals, so staying home or wearing a flimsy cloth or surgical mask was an act of great care for others as well as self. Back then, no individual effort was enough to avoid catching it. We’ve come a long way.

I still, five years later, wear a mask in indoor public places, for my own protection. Most of the time I avoid being in large indoor crowds, like eating indoors in restaurants or going to shows. I even own expensive at-home PCR type testing equipment to check myself or friends for infections before hanging out, or after compromising on my normal precautions for a special event.

But that’s still not enough for them.

White supremacist purity tests mean I get critiqued for not doing enough, when I am already doing so much. White supremacist surveillance culture means when I post a photo of me indoors without a mask on, I get DMs asking where my mask is. And I’m “one of them”! Imagine how they treat anyone who isn’t white or taking covid precatuions?

Anything I do will never be enough for them, because I also believe in science and statistics. I don’t wear a mask when I am outside on a walk. I don’t wear a mask when on a picnic with friends. I happily eat unmasked at restaurant patios. I don’t wear a mask when indoors with friends who are cautious like me. I go to events that don’t require masks. They’ve said to me, how dare an outside, low attendance event not require everyone to wear masks. Well…because the science says these are very low risk scenarios. Because the science says that the papers about outdoor transmission that the white covid cautious communities cite (when they actually cite things), have been debunked and are false. Science also says that their claims that the virus remains activated and infectious indoors in the air for hours after the sick person leaves, is, you guessed it, wrong. Science even says the nasal sprays and mouth washes that they’re adamant about using in case they help, don’t actually help (that’s newer, at least. It used to just be unknown).

But they won’t tell you that their theories and data are wrong. They’ll cling to the tiny possibility that it could still be true, their whiteness once again making them afraid to be wrong. Afraid to make a mistake in the quest for being the most good person, for being the most right.

Being alive involves mistakes. Being alive is risky. They look at the nearly 99% filtration efficacy of their N95 mask and say, not good enough, I can only be around people if every person is also masked. PS, the science says one-way masking with a well-fit N95 is actually really good protection (there’s no solid numbers because of all the nuance involved). Zero risk? No. Nothing is. Nothing in life is zero risk! And it shouldn’t be!

White covid cautious queers treat risk like a deadly sin, something we must avoid at all costs. The obsession with being zero-risk is a false binary, a mystical cocoon they’ve imagined as a way to shelter themselves from the reality of living in a fucked up world, and pretend they have some control over the outcomes. We can’t walk without risk of falling down. We can’t use a vehicle without risk of crashing. We can’t meet a new person without risk of challenging our presumptions. We can’t love without risk of heartbreak. We can’t be in community, without risk. We can’t be anti-capitalist, without risk. We can’t be race traitors, without risk.

They’ll claim that wearing a mask in public is a risk, that advocating for masking is a risk, as if they’re now a member of a new persecuted group. Disability, sure, queerness, sure. Masking? Erm, no, not when you’re white. Look around! As Trey Grief & Grits writes, “Within the colonial imagination that we are living in, white folks often conflate safety and comfort. They have a monopoly on safety, and all the power to maintain their safety through ample resources, violence and subjugation. But white folks have such an incredibly low tolerance for discomfort, and anything that makes them uncomfortable, registers in their minds and bodies as a threat to their safety.” How can they possibly think that Black and Brown folks get to choose to avoid risk? Indigenous communities have been living with the increased risk of death since the day white people first touched their land. How dare white people uphold risk avoidance as a sacred tenant.

I caught covid once, in 2022, despite all of my precautions, in a very low-risk scenario. Did I throw up my hands and say there’s no point in precautions? No. But neither did I throw up my hands and say I wasn’t taking enough precautions, and should now do more. To borrow from D&D, I rolled a 1 on the dice, a critical fail. Even if it was only a 1% chance of catching covid in that scenario, someone has to be the 1%. And it was just bad luck that it was me. Wrong place, wrong time. Was I unhappy? Yes. But I didn’t need to obsess about it. This is part of life.

Harm reduction isn’t supposed to be about risk avoidance, it’s inclusive of risk. It’s about reducing unnecessary additional risk, making risk-taking safer, but still taking the risk. Harm reduction for viruses would include access to N95s, and education about use and fit. Advocacy for commercial air filtration. Taking personal precautions, yes, *while* still going out in public and immersing in community. Taking precautions without placing expectations on community before being willing to engage.

Taking precautions means I do miss out on things, I’m not going to pretend that’s not the case. There are events I don’t go to, or don’t go to often, because the risk is higher (ie large screaming crowds indoors). Missing out on things is hard, it’s true. That’s been true before covid, but a lot of people didn’t know it until lockdowns. Disability involves grief. And my (white) people love to avoid grief. The fear of grief might even be why they’re so afraid of risk.

There are things I can’t do. That’s my reality. Sometimes I feel left out. It makes me sad. It sucks. The grief is continual, and a lot of disabled and ill folks don’t like to sit with that. And a lot of not disabled or ill people want so badly to avoid that. So the white covid cautious queers demand that the public accommodate them, eliminate their risk, so that they don’t have to wrestle with the grief of missing out. But we have to feel it. Feeling it, is how we navigate risk, is how we keep living. There are things I can’t do and places I can’t go! This is life, pandemic or not. For some of us, it’s always been this way, and always will be! Covid didn’t do this.

Covid isn’t even the first virus to be so disabling and worth avoiding. I understand the desire to avoid long term disability and chronic illness, I really do. But once again, it’s a risk of everyday life. Even before covid, anyone could get pneumonia or severe ME/CFS from a common cold. We could get ME/CFS from basic cold sores (herpes virus). We can get ME/CFS from getting mono (EB virus) from sharing a drink. (ME/CFS is what most people with severe long covid have, it’s a/the big piece of what makes it severe). But to take precautions to avoid ever catching ME/CFS, would require extreme levels of surveillance and avoidance of participation in public life, and significant reduction of quality of life. Why live like you have ME/CFS, if you don’t have it?!

And if I’m saying the quiet part out loud anyway, let me add that I don’t actually think it’s the vague general populace’s responsibility to protect every individual from illness. In relationship? Yes, let’s negotiate that together. Let’s figure out each other’s vulnerabilities and risk tolerance and navigate through it together when they conflict. It was a hard transition to go from “we keep each other safe” in 2020-21 to “you’re on your own”, in 2022, I get it. It was for me too. I grieved that loss. I felt left behind and betrayed. But that time has passed, and we’re not going back. Humans are so good at solidarity during acute crises, but we suck at the long game. Ask anyone who was disabled or chronically ill and excluded from public life from before covid.

The general populace cannot accommodate all disabilities and illnesses. Access needs and accommodations are so frequently contradictory - one person needs a mask on to prevent viral transmission, another needs to be unmasked to prevent a seizure trigger. One person needs a service dog for guidance, another needs a pet free space to be able to breathe easily. One person needs bright lights and high contrast colors for vision, another needs dimmed lights and greys for sensory processing. Get the idea? Who is to say that a stranger is required to risk their own asthma attack, a seizure, a panic attack, etc in order to reduce someone else’s viral risk? Especially when that someone can wear their own mask to significantly reduce the risk? Why is the covid cautious person’s accommodation need automatically more important than the stranger in the same room? That can only be negotiated in relationship, and we don’t get that in larger social contexts. So no, I don’t look at every unmasked person and see ableism or eugenics or a walking contradiction. Masks cost money, they can be socially and physically uncomfortable, and they’re one more thing to think about in a world with a lot of stress and harm. Let alone the medical issues they can trigger. I’ve come to see that there are many reasons to not wear a mask that are just as legitimate as the needs to wear one. And, people also get to not care about the risk. That’s their prerogative.

Do I want our broader cultural norms to move toward more accessibility? Of course! I want our architectural norms to include ramps and elevators and bigger bathrooms with changing tables. I want bigger seats and more leg room and wider corridors and lighter doors. I want improved ventilation and increased air filtration and purification. I want more accessible parking spots and more paved wooded trails. That’s infrastructure. Inclusive infrastructure benefits everyone.

One of my diagnoses is Mast Cell Activation Syndrome, which is like having an allergic reaction to random miscellaneous things, without being actually allergic. Mine manifests in non-severe ways, but some people experience anaphylaxis. Folks with severe MCAS have been excluded from public spaces for decades because of things like air fresheners pumped into department stores, lingering fragrance on a stranger’s clothing from their scented dryer sheets, you name it. There are some businesses with fragrance-free policies, but what if a new person forgets about the policy? I did, the first time I went to a fragrance-free clinic. I forgot that my deodorant is scented. If you had anaphylactic reactions to fragrances, would you trust that policy and go anyway? If my MCAS was severe, I would expect my close relationships to accommodate me, to remember most of the time, but I would never expect nor trust the public to. If I were on immune-suppressants, I wouldn’t expect or trust the public to practice good hygiene, and leave my hand sanitizer at home. Would it be helpful if the general populace improved their hand hygiene? Yes. But I still wouldn’t go near a cruise ship.

The public at large is not responsible for accommodating every access need, and couldn’t accommodate every access need, and couldn’t be trusted to, even if they could. In an ideal world, we’d all care about each other so much that we would try to. I see Black and Brown covid-cautious communities striving for this. I see them do covid mitigations and nuance well, and building relational bridges and increased the community of care. But white covid-cautious communities aren’t even trying. If covid disappeared today, most white covid cautious queers wouldn’t make choices to protect immune compromised or severely allergic strangers in public. Because being white and covid-cautious is not actually about community care. Being white covid-cautious isn’t actually translating into increasing accessibility. It’s translating into micromanaging and policing, upholding white supremacy.

White covid cautious queers act like Covid is the be all end all of oppression and governmental betrayal, as if this isn’t just par for the course. Sure, our generation hasn’t had another global pandemic. But we’ve always had health care disparities. We’ve always had prioritizing corporate profit over worker safety. We’ve even for a long time, had laws criminalizing face coverings (White middle-class folks often don’t know that, even when they’re wearing ski masks in the winter, because it isn’t used against them like it is against Black and Brown folks). It’s just now white people are experiencing a sliver of it, and they hate that discomfort. I saw someone online have the audacity to claim to Ashtin Berry (@thecollectress), a Black woman, that covid was the single most impactful event of the last 5 years. As if Ashtin could have forgotten that covid happened (as if she hasn’t written about its impact), and as if we didn’t have the Uprising, the multiple genocides, and *gestures at everything related to the federal government*. There are so many people in the world, or even in the US, who’d say that covid can get in line, because there’s been a whole lot more where that came from in the last five years. Yes, it’s been big. But for many people it’s not the biggest.

Medical racism? Poverty? Police brutality? You won’t see the white covid cautious queers taking action or speaking out on those as much as they police the behavior of everyone who doesn’t meet their impossible covid standards. They crow about community care, even going so far as to share that covid disproportionately impacts BIPOC communities, but won’t show up for their neighbors being picked up by ICE, and won’t make a whisper about how growing up in the Black and immigrant areas of the city causes severe asthma, lead poisoning, etc. They won’t consider why it is so hard to be disabled and ill, and they’re not going to work on the systemic issues in our healthcare and social security. They’re not going to come to a neighborhood organizing meeting or protest, because masks aren’t required. They’re going to leave the labor - and the risk - of changing oppressive systems to Black and Brown people, while they complain about the movement being inaccessible. They expect everyone to show up for them, but won’t show up for anyone else, claiming they’re the ones being discriminated against. They’re the ones facing ableism.

I also see an especially targeted judgment of other disabled and chronically ill people who aren’t being as cautious, implying that we should “know better.” But we get to make our own risk calculations, and we get to make “bad” choices if we want to. It’s not a moral imperative to “fight” my illness or to be always striving to get “healthier” (or to avoid getting sicker). On the contrary, I think those of us already disabled or ill understand the fleeting nature of “health” and abilities. We already are restricted by our bodies and miss out on so much, it stands to reason we’d want to live large and take bigger risks, rather than shrink our worlds and opportunities even more. When my fears of getting “worse” rise up in me, I remind myself that it’s already happened. Regardless of covid. I could do everything “right”, I could take every precaution available to me, and still get sicker and more disabled. And that’s the reality I must choose to feel, to grieve, to accept. So why wouldn’t I go out and live loudly, and brightly, and take some risks?!

Here’s what I wish. I wish white covid cautious queers would just be honest that they’re being cautious for themselves. So am I! There’s nothing wrong with that! They can set their own risk tolerances, and live by them. It doesn’t have to be couched under false or aspirational claims of solidarity or community care or inclusion. I wish they’d deconstruct their whiteness and work to uproot and betray the white supremacy inherent in their “gut instincts” and the scaffolding of their so-called critical thinking. I wish they’d be honest about their fear of death, fear of disability, fear of illness, fear of missing out, fear of not being perfect enough. That they’d say they’re too afraid to be in a one-way masking situation, and own that fear. And instead of fighting with people about masking, wrestle with why being ill in the USA is so scary, and work to undercut or reform the systems that make it so, rather than shitting on other people. I wish they’d be honest that they’re terrified to feel the grief that comes with all of that.

And if they are being cautious in order to protect other people, that’s great! Kudos, Me too. They can encourage their friends to do the same, in relationship. And then, in relationship, hold each other accountable to stop expecting the public to do the work, when they should be.

---

Edited to Add: Thank you to the reader who let me know that the comments, where I share more about the science mentioned in the essay, aren’t visible to people without an account. I’ve copied it here:

Here is the science I referenced in the post, for those asking. To be clear, having links to scientific papers doesn't all the sudden make claims legitimate - a lot of covid cautious groups that put out misinformation, have links to back it up just like I do. It's just that the studies they're linking to have been critiqued by scientific peers, retracted, were very poorly done, etc. Actually reading them and comparing them to what the experts are saying about them is key.

Indoors: The claim that covid stays in the air and can still be contagious for 16 hours after the sick person left the room, is from a 2020 study in a rotating drum model that doesn’t make sense in the real world. A 2022 study made a more realistic scenario considering the temperature and humidity and pH in the room, and how being in the air breaks down the envelope of the virus, reducing its infectivity by 90% within 20 minutes in a standard indoor setting, and even by 50% in the first few seconds. So while yes, technically covid can remain in the air indoors for longer than that, it is a drastic change in risk. Obviously additional factors like ventilation, how long the sick person was in the room, how much viral load the person let out, etc also impact the risk. Which brings us back to the point of needing to better assess risk, and not treat all risk levels as the same. Al Haddrell, an aerosol scientist and one of the authors of the 2022 studies, has an excellent thread on X with images to describe the results and a youtube video describing it as well. He also has a video about why the drum study was just plain wrong. I've found it valuable to learn from both virus experts and air experts.

Nasal sprays & mouthwash: This zine gives info and links regarding how nasal sprays and mouthwash are no longer recommended, and in the past the recommendations were always theoretical. A paper on xylitol sprays was retracted, a meta-analysis of cpc mouthwash trials rules effectiveness as inconclusive. However, I do want to give the caveat that this zine also shares the misinfo mentioned above about covid in the air, as it is working off of the 2020 info not more recent info. Hopefully they will update that someday.

Regarding outdoors: Adding to the knowledge above about covid indoors, the outdoors has no walls or ceilings to contain or impede air movement, there is full ventilation and fresh air replacements, and sunlight (UV) quickly deactivates the virus. Being outdoors is clearly low risk.

Here’s a response I made on IG a year ago regarding what a covid cautious group was sharing, similar to what I’ve seen from others:

Here comes another extensive PSA for my Covid cautious friends. First, some reminders - 1. I am not an infectious disease specialist, I'm just reading what's provided. 2. My personal goal is not zero covid risk (not possible for me even if I wanted it), my goal is to lower my risk significantly. 3. I believe in communicating about risk accurately & calmly rather than shaming or scaring to motivate behavior change. 4. I believe that the covid-cautious groups out here sharing info are doing their best and want people to be safe. All that being said - I am going to say some things that the latter may not like.

Have you seen this post? August 2024 from Masked NH

from Masked NH post: WHILE BEING OUTSIDE IS SAFER THAN BEING INDOORS, IT IS NOT FOOLPROOF, ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE IN CROWDED AREAS.

We're gonna talk about it. Because while this statement above, that Covid can be transmitted while outdoors in dense crowds, is generally agreed upon, the following slides and claims are NOT. And using misleading or false information to bring people to a cause is not helpful. Pushing for more extreme measures and purity of behavior is also not helpful. I am seeing similar posts to this one by other groups too, stretching and exaggerating the science to make being outdoors without a mask sound nearly as risky as indoors, without nuance. Let's get into their sources. PS - disagree with how I read something? Please tell me! We're all just doing our best out here & it takes communal knowledge

from Masked NH post: COVID MOVES LIKE SMOKE AND CAN HANG IN THE AIR FOR HOURS. BEING OUTSIDE WITH A GOOD BREEZE CAN HELP DISPERSE THE VIRUS, BUT THERE'S NO GUARANTEE IT WILL MOVE AWAY FROM YOU.

Yes the virus can be detected in the air hours after a contagious person exhales.That was found in 2020. HOWEVER.That does NOT mean it is viable and it does NOT mean it is infectious still. Detectable and "you could catch it" are vastly different. Just like someone tests positive on a PCR for months after they've stopped being contagious - just like Covid is detectable on surfaces for hours or a whole day, but will not make you sick. I have seen no science saying you can still catch it for that long. They don't cite a source for this slide, but I've seen this statement enough to recognize it, and it's source is cited in some of their later sources.

from Masked NH post: AT A PARK IN SOUTHWEST CHINA IN 2022, AN UNMASKED JOGGER WHO WAS COVID POSITIVE INFECTED 39 PEOPLE ON HIS ROUTE OUTSIDE. HE WAS THERE FOR JUST HALF AN HOUR AND HE DID NOT TALK TO OR MAKE DIRECT CONTACT WITH ANYONE. (1)

This one is TRICKY bc of distrust of China. I read the source article & found the original study & read some ID/epi opinions on it. In a desire for brevity I am not going to get deep into it, so read it yourself or DM me for details. Tl;dr – it's fishy and wildly unlikely. The Chinese CDC claims to have done genomic sequencing to show that the exact mutation the jogger had is also what the 39 people had BUT has never produced the results to be verified. The only way this is true is if no one had any other exposures which requires their contact tracing to have been done to perfection, which is very unlikely. It claims the jogger first caught covid in a way that is highly doubtful/maybe impossible which brings into question all the claims of the study.

from Masked NH post: AT THE QINGKOU NIGHT MARKET IN CHINA'S ZHEJIANG PROVINCE, THREE FAMILY MEMBERS, ALL COVID POSITIVE, INFECTED 131 VENDORS AND CUSTOMERS AT THE OUTDOOR, OPEN AIR MARKET. THEY WERE THERE FOR AN HOUR AND 4 MINUTES. A STUDY CONDUCTED ON THIS EVENT SHOWED THAT IN THAT OUTDOOR SETTING, CONTAGIOUS COVID AEROSOLS CAN HANG IN THE AIR FOR AN HOUR AND 39 MINUTES. THE MAJORITY OF THE SPREAD DID NOT INVOLVE DIRECT CONTACT. (2)

This one is also widely doubted. There was NO genomic sequencing to show transmission chain. there was NO study of air flow. it is ONLY based on math: how many minutes between when the sources were at the market & people who later tested positive = 1 hr 39 min. TL; DR - it's CONJECTURE, an unproven hypothesis, there's no science about how the virus works. once again how the supposed original source caught covid is vague and dubious. the said source tested negative on PCR the day of the market AND the day after, a false negative twice is highly unlikely. once again it assumes no one else had any other exposures bc contact tracing was presumed perfect, which is unlikely. it was a super spreader event, but it is far, far more likely that more people at the market were infectious than just 3.

from Masked NH post: ALARMINGLY, COVID IS BEING FOUND IN HERDS OF DEER, INDICATING THAT COVID CAN SPREAD WELL OUTSIDE, HANGING AND TRAVELING IN THE AIR. DEER TYPICALLY AVOID PEOPLE AND WOULD LIKELY NOT HAVE DIRECT CONTACT WITH HUMANS. (3)

This last one is actually the one that bothers me the most. Because in the previous slides, the creators were pulling info and conclusions directly from the studies themselves. They were poorly made studies & therefore poorly chose for education, but, the makers were simply repeating what they read. NOT SO with this one. The last sentence is NOT accurate to the cited source's conclusion. Tl;dr - Deer have covid from presumed close contact with people. They tested 8,830 deer across 26 states across 6 months and 109 had Covid. they know it was human to deer transmission bc of genomic sequencing sequencing showing mutation matches. the study specifically concludes that the deer likely had close contact with humans through hunting and feeding (hello, my neighbors hand feed the deer here, they are always close). there was NO studying of airflow or virus lifespan or transmissibility in air. the ONLY concern of the study is that the virus will hang out in deer as a "reservoir" & mutate more & make it harder to eradicate in ppl.

from Masked NH post: WEAR A MASK, ESPECIALLY IN CROWDED AREAS, EVEN IF YOU'RE OUTDOORS.

TL;DR just bc a helpful group posted it & it sounds scary doesn't mean it's accurate. Like I said, I think this group is doing their best & wanting to help people stay safe. And. I think we can help people stay safe through accurate, well vetted information, not misleading or jumping to conclusions.Is Covid transmissible outdoors? Yes. And it fully depends on all the same factors as indoors - air speed, air direction, air flow or blocks (ie walls, ceilings), temp/humidity, proximity to infected person, duration near person, person's viral load, vulnerability, etc. But so many of those are drastically improved when outdoors. Walking in a park away from crowds is very low risk. Feeding a deer by hand is very low risk for you. And if you choose to wear a mask anytime you are outdoors, in situations when I don't? I support you and will advocate for your right to do so, unbothered and in peace. You get to make your choices based on the science and your own vulnerabilities and risk. And if we ever hang out outdoors in a park & you are masking, so will I. Because friends keep each other safe & mutually accommodate each other. The End.

Masked NH Sources as posted in the caption of the above post:

1. Unmasked jogger infected 39 with Omicron in Chinese Park, study finds. South China Morning Post. (2022, November 29). https://amp.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3201401/unmasked-jogger-infected-39-people-omicron-chinese-park-study-finds
2. Luo, M., Liu, S., Zhu, L., Wang, F., Wu, K., He, H., Qi, X., Pang, Z., Dong, X., Gong, Z., & Yu, M. (2023, July 4). Analysis of a super-transmission of SARS- COV-2 omicron variant BA.5.2 in the Outdoor Night Market. Frontiers in public health. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10352652/#:~:text=Results,min%20and%20still%20be%20contagious.
3. Goodman, Brenda. "Covid-19 Spread between Humans and Deer, Study Shows, Raising Concerns about Animal Reservoirs." CNN, Cable News Network, 12 July 2023, www.cnn.com/2023/07/12/health/covid-humans-deer-study/index.html.

1. This essay is probably going to make a lot of people mad. And the fact that I’m the one who wrote it might surprise a lot of people. It was important for me to honor my anger in this essay and not add caveats. But because of who I am as a person and the relationships I have, I will add one here - this is about the collective of white covid cautious queers as a group, or perhaps a cultural movement. Naturally, like in any group, there are individuals who break the mold. Maybe even a whole “bloc” that does. But even if that’s you, it’s important to know the impact of the company you keep & the groups you identify with. For example, I take covid precautions, I am white, I am queer. I embrace the political queer identity and that group ethos, I will take to heart critiques against the queer community. I am a white race traitor because I was born into that group and yet I work to betray our ethos, I will join you in the critiques. But you won’t catch me claiming covid cautious as part of my identity, because the impact and values I see espoused by these (white) groups aren’t aligned with mine.