A Psychoanalytic Reconsideration of Chemsex and Anti-retroviral Time; or, It’s G O’Clock

This article intervenes in contemporary critical scholarship on the ethics of chemsex and other so-called ‘risky’ gay male sexual practices through a careful appraisal of psychoanalytic theory on subjectivity and sexuality. I argue that the emerging field of critical chemsex studies prioritises contemporary approaches to ‘bodies and pleasures’ at the expense of subjectivity, leading to an inability to adequately theorise some participants’ avowed experiences of suffering from problematic chemsex use. Drawing critically on previous psychoanalytic scholarship on barebacking, I argue that, contrary to stereotypical depictions, chemsex may be motivated not by a self-destructive death drive, but rather a paradoxical attempt to shelter oneself from this drive. This idea may helpfully counter the psychoanalytic tendency to exceptionalise or pathologise gay male sexual practices, while also questioning the ethical valence attributed to chemsex. I conclude with an exploration of Lacanian ethics and the implications this may hold for critical chemsex studies and public health.