Yes, Stacey Campfield's monkey-sex theory of AIDS has been a real embarrassment—yet it is interesting to consider the specific details he must imagine as he thinks about his theory. The obvious question is whether Campfield imagines the man in his theory having "straight" sex with a girl monkey or "gay" sex with a boy monkey.
Since the backbone of his mistaken ideas seems to be that straight sex is relatively safe from AIDS, Campfield must imagine AIDS to have started with gay sex between a man and a male monkey. But, does he imagine it to have been oral or anal gay monkey sex? With either (or both), does he imagine the monkey on top or as the bottom? In any case, does he imagine the monkey as a cute little primate or as a hulking great ape?
Is it possible for Stacey Campfield to hold and promote his monkey-sex theory of AIDS without contemplating the details?
J. David Buckwalter