AIDS is Becoming More "Progressive"

When AIDS first crept into the public consciousness in the early 1980s, the victims of the terrifying new disease were mostly gay men in North America and Europe. One after another they died, as partners and friends despaired of becoming infected themselves and wondered if the next of the innumerable funerals they attended would be their own.

But 25 years later, gay men have found themselves relegated to the periphery of the HIV-AIDS pandemic, which has expanded exponentially into every continent and to every possible segment of humanity.

The shift in focus from men who have sex with men (MSM), as they’re now called, to women and children, and from western countries to Africa and other southern regions, was nowhere more apparent than at the week-long International AIDS Conference, which wrapped up Friday. [...]

Franck DeRose, the Washington-based executive director of the global Condom Project, called it deplorable that there was no representation of the MSM community “inside the conference.”

“I’m not resentful. I’m a little bit disappointed actually,” he said. “Am I surprised there’s not something on MSM? Yes I am. I would think that we would be a little bit more progressive.”

While acknowledging that gay men were the most affected in the early days of the epidemic, conference co-chair Dr. Helene Gayle of Atlanta said that since then, HIV-AIDS has become much more diverse. (source)

AIDS is a very “progressive” disease - it will accept the whole rainbow of people into it’s fold.

Years ago when I was a volunteer as a “buddy” for an AIDS organization, all of our clients were gay men. As a buddy, I would take on clients and help them out in a variety of ways - clean house, shop for them, run errands, take them for drives, etc. It was something I could do and since I was not yet employed, I was able to pour a lot of time into doing this.

Every couple of weeks, it was required that we had a buddy support group meeting. This was very important because of the nature of the work we were doing, it was a place we could go to find support for ourselves. Once in awhile, a fellow buddy would let us know that his client buddy had died. I remember dreading going to this meeting. When your client dies, you are required to let the organization know, mostly for your support. My buddy died in the hospital and I was with him the night he died, along with his father and his husband. At the meeting, I told everyone, “I’m afraid I have some bad news. John (not his real name) died two days ago.” I tried to say more, but started crying. And that was the place to do it. That was what the group was for. I was strong for his family and never shed a tear in their presence. But afterwards, I realized how attached I had become to him. This is part of being human. You feel life, or you don’t.

At one such meeting, the subject came up that we had a new potential client. The only problem was that he was a straight man who had AIDS. This was twelve or so years ago, so it was unusual to have a straight man come to us for help. But there was no where else for him to turn. AIDS was primarily in this country at the time a disease that gay men had. This straight man contracted the disease through IV drug use. He was Hispanic, and he “didn’t think” he would have “much of a problem” being around gay men.

Well, many of us had a problem with him being part of our organization. He was straight. Who the hell did he think he was coming to us for help? Where the hell was he and people like him when we needed their help? The answer is obvious. They were no where to be found because they really didn’t care if gays died from this or not. That is as honest as I can be about this, and to this day, I believe that to be true.

But, we concluded, rightfully so, that we were doing exactly the same thing to him that was done to us. I remember saying at the meeting after coming to the conclusion that we should take him as a client, “Where does the cycle of hate stop? The man dislikes us, perhaps hates us, but the fact is, he has AIDS and needs our help.” It’s sometimes difficult to overcome the anger we have for society, which is totally justified, into doing the right thing. We did the right thing by taking him in. And afterwards, his ideas changed as far as gay men were concerned.

So today, I was remembering all of that as I read this story. They have an AIDS conference and some people are angry that gay men were not talked about at the conference. I admit that I’m a bit surprised at this as well, but we have to look at the reality of this. AIDS does not take into consideration who you are, who you sleep with, what your gender is, what your nationality is.... so why should we? In Africa, there is an entire generation of children who are now orphans because both of their parents have died from AIDS. That is reality.

In this country, I’m alarmed that women are contracting AIDS at an alarming rate. I’m frightened that I’m seeing this more and more in the African American community in this country. I’m concerned that more and more young gay men are contracting this disease because AIDS is now being portrayed as a “manageable disease” with the use of “drug cocktails”, which apparently is being reduced to “one pill a day”.

And I’m really concerned that our government can hardly say the word “condom”, let alone say that we should be talking about “safe sex” to children as early as middle school (hey, they are having sex at that age!). But our government thinks that if we just pray hard enough, think good thoughts, and tell the kids to be abstinent, that will be good enough. It’s like a take-off from the Nancy Reagan days, where her drug campaign slogan was “Just say NO to drugs”. Yeah, that worked well. Keep thinking those good thoughts, Mr. Bush. Oh, and pray! I don’t know what world our government lives in, but it’s not reality!

The Bush administration is accustomed to criticism of its AIDS policies by those attending the biennial International AIDS Conference. But this week, two U.S. leaders in the fight against HIV — including Bush’s gay former AIDS czar — took aim at what they called the president’s “ideologically driven, abstinence-until-marriage focus that places many at risk of needlessly contracting HIV.”

In an opinion piece published Aug. 14 in the Toronto Star, timed to coincide with the city hosting the XVI annual International AIDS Conference Aug. 13-18, Scott Evertz, Bush’s former director of the Office of National AIDS Policy, wrote that current domestic policy is “creating confusion and fear among [HIV-prevention organizations] regarding the appropriate role of condoms.” [...]

The pair wrote that comprehensive HIV prevention could be a lifesaver for people around the globe, from underage sex workers in developing countries to “the young gay teen in Washington D.C., told to abstain until marriage when marriage is impossible.” (source)

The fight is not about who got air time and who didn’t get mentioned. That fight is ridding AIDS from the face of this earth once and for all - not arguing about who was mentioned and who wasn’t mentioned. We need to keep our eye on the target and stop all the fighting. What a waste of energy.