Let's Talk About AIDS

[hivliving]

@crimelords 

tell me what about this blog takes hiv lightly i would love to know.. it is totally possible to support hiv+ lgbt people without diminishing the institutional and societal failures which allowed hivaids to impact the lgbt community so deeply in the first place.

[auntbutch]

it’s so strange to me that @crimelords would use gran fury as an example of why hiv/aids should always be presented in a serious tone when much of what ACT UP and its affinity groups (ie gran fury) were doing was creating a public discourse around hiv/aids that wasn’t based in pitying (or fearing) “victims” but instead reconfiguring PWA and people who are HIV+ as human beings with complex lives and emotions. a lot of the graphics and art used humor (know your scumbags), and many of the direct actions were meant to highlight love and affection - for instance the kiss-ins that gran fury was almost certainly referencing with the “kissing doesn’t kill” campaign. there’s also work from outside ACT UP (obviously), like diseased pariah news, which included stuff like “i fisted jesse helms” and “the adventures of captain condom”

simon watney wrote an article about issues related to this, there are passages here and here. the idea that promoting love or humor or lightheartedness and discussing hiv/aids as something other than a death sentence are somehow contrary to the goals of aids activists, both historical and contemporary, doesn’t make any sense to me

[letstalkaboutaids]

I’m reblogging this because:

1) like @auntbutch I am baffled at the diea that HIV/AIDS should be all serious business all the time, like! what kind of a terrible existence is that to insist someone has because of an illness, if you’re not wallowing in it you’re failing yourself. and also lol @ using Gran Fury as an example for all the reasons outlined above.

2) but also this made me think of Jessica Lynn Whitbread who is a currently queer woman artist living with HIV. she does an event called No Pants No Problem which is all about creating a space that’s fun and flirty and not serious business because people living with HIV get too much of that! sometimes you just wanna make out with someone! 

she also does Love Positive Women which is an event entirely centered around giving women with HIV/AIDS some love and positivity which, rather than being some ~cutesy tumblr bullshit~ or whatever is something they almost never get! it’s a wonder thing people can do to support women living with HIV/AIDS so like if you read those bad posts and now are reconsidering I suggest getting involved in the next one. 

[frettful]

horrifying fun fact of the day: so greenwich village, which is the neighborhood in nyc where the stonewall riots took place and which was a v important gay center from like the 50s-80s, is now super swanky and full of touristy boutiques and expensive apartments and stuff. st vincent’s, the local hospital which had the first aids ward on the east coast, closed a couple years ago and is being replaced with luxury condos. all of this is sad enough, BUT i just found out that one of the reasons it’s so gentrified now is that the aids crisis was really awesome for real estate. ppl were dying in thousands and leaving empty apartments behind, which their landlords would then rent at higher prices until only rich ppl could afford to live there :)

[frettful]

elaphaia said: also during the aids crisis landlords would shut their heat off in the winter knowing it would kill ppl so they could then rent 4 higher :-)

[queerqueerspawn]

Reminder that the cishet dominated government didn’t just ignore the effects of HIV/AIDS because of how concentrated the deaths were in other communities because they hate us, but also because they materially benefited from it - because they owned most of the buildings, because our partners and other kin had no legal right to our possessions, and because they commodified and monopolized antiretrovirals to bilk us.

[problematicfeminist-deactivated]

Never forget ACT UP NYC that consisted of marginalized members of the LGBT community, many of whom were dying of AIDS. All of whom fought hard and valiantly against AIDS and HIV/AIDS discrimination. Never never forget about the brave men and women who smuggled drugs for AIDS patients into the US because the FDA was taking too long to approve drugs here and people were dying. 

Never forget that people were often kicked out of their housing because they were unable to afford rent and treatment, because their partner died, or because of outright discrimination. 

Enjoy your luxury apartments. I hope you remember the men and women who died so you could live there.  

[thesylverlining]

Just remembered Mimi’s line in RENT. “It’s nothing/they turned off my heat/and I’m a little weak on my feet.”

Jesus. I know this was before a lot of tumblr’s time, but we can’t forget this shit.

[lavenderstereo]

Rent was written by a straight man who stole basically everything to do with HIV/aids and lgbt people from other writers especially and primarily from lesbian author Sarah Schulman’s “People in Trouble. So like “Rent” the musical represents, but also reproduces, the sort of problems this post is talking about.

[projectqueer]

NHS England has made its final decision to not provide PrEP to gay and bisexual men. The national health provider has denied it is their responsibility to provide a drug that can help prevent the transmission of HIV. NHS England does fund other medication to protect sexual health, such as the oral contraceptive pill.

In March, NHS England said PrEP could not be considered for the specialized services annual prioritization process. It said ‘local authorities are responsible for HIV prevention services’, and not NHS England. They were forced to reconsider the decision after the shock of HIV and health charities and many politicians urged them to rethink their plans. The National AIDS Trust threatened legal action.

But in a statement issued today (31 May), NHS England made clear they would not offer the drug. The National AIDS Trust is considering further legal action

Deborah Gold, Chief Executive of NAT, said: ‘NHS England is sitting on something that could be the beginning of the end for the HIV epidemic – if only it were made available.  The refusal to commission it for all those at significant risk is astonishing.   Seventeen people are being diagnosed with HIV every day. We are extremely disappointed and we will now be looking at our options, including further legal action.’

Matthew Hodson, the director of gay men’s health charity, GMFA, told Gay Star News: The NHS’s decision not to ever consider commissioning PrEP is both a shock and a disappointment. Although the commissioning landscape has become complicated there have been clear indications the NHS is able to commission preventative treatments.

‘Each year, thousands of gay men become infected with HIV and many of these infections could be prevented if PrEP was available. We now have all the tools we need to prevent new HIV infections but this requires commitment and investment. Without PrEP being added to our prevention armory, we are no closer to ending HIV. At a recent LGBT reception in Number 10, Prime Minister David Cameron made a strong commitment to do whatever he could to facilitate access to PrEP. In light of this, the NHS decision is a particularly crushing blow.’

[sobercommunist]

then again, is anyone really surprised that a terf’s first response to an HIV+ man saying “you accused me of rape because i talked about having sex with my ex-girlfriend” is “wait, hold up, did his ex KNOW he was HIV+???? that would definitely be rape, if not attempted murder.”

anyway, @getoffmyastroterf, yes my ex was aware of my status you stupid fuck

[getoffmyastroturf]

Fuck you asshole! I was raped in the 80s when all this shit hit mainstream media. So excuse fucking me if my response was “did they know” because MY news was full of women who DIDN’T know and DIED. You sanctimonious piece of shit, I’m not in the goddamn mood.

[sobercommunist]

“fuck you asshole! i was raped in the 80s when the mainstream media was full of fear-mongering homophobia! so excuse fucking me if my response was the same homophobic stigmatizing garbage that always comes up when terfs talk about HIV!”

is anybody really surprised

[getoffmyastroturf]

I see you missed the whole “women didn’t know and they died” bit, which was the point I was making. That straight men more or less made a game out’ve infecting women for shits and giggles. That’s the news I’m talking about asshole!

[sobercommunist]

“That straight men more or less made a game out’ve infecting women for shits and giggles. That’s the news I’m talking about asshole!”

the same homophobic stigmatizing garbage that always comes up when terfs talk about HIV. honestly, i hope you fucking die so painfully you have nooo idea.

[radical-pharah]

I am a lesbian and I agree with @getoffmyastroterf. Men (and women) have to tell their partners they are infected. If not, it is rape. It is pretty well known that very few people would consent to a life threatening disease. I don’t know the circumstance in which she addressed it, but I know plenty of men that defend other men who infect women without informing the women of their condition. (If this a particular instance just seemed really cruel, feel free to say so. ) Anyone with an STD needs to inform sexual partners of their condition(s). I hate that the HIV/AIDS thing reflects negatively on homosexual and bi men, but the increased rates and death rates came from individuals not informing other individuals (whether or not the intent to deceive was there).

[letstalkaboutaids]

Actually, the increased rates of transmission tend to come from the following places:

1) Tons of fucking stigma against HIV+ people–stigma that you and many others encourage–which keeps HIV+ people from connecting with communities, resources, etc, etc, etc. 

2) Less information and activism in the public eye about HIV/AIDS, which means people are less informed and less able to make their own risk management decisions

3) Vulnerable populations are unable to access medication, which allows for the virus to become undetectable (and therefore unable to be passed on)

4) HIV criminalization of non-disclosure–the very thing that you are arguing for–is bad on many, many levels but it is particularly bad public health policy since it actively encourages high risk communities (which include poor women! women of color! undocumented women! not just men) to not learn their status so that they can’t be jailed for it

Not one of those is “too many people aren’t disclosing to partners”. If you genuinely care about non-disclosure, the kind of arguments you’re making are exactly the kind of arguments that increase stigma and keep HIV+ people from being safe enough to disclose (among other factors). If you want all HIV+ to disclose at all times, you need to support policy and culture that makes that a safe, reasonable choice for HIV+ people to make. 

[radical-pharah]

A lot of valid points, but criminalization of non-disclosure implies that the person knew very well that they had HIV. So testing after sex and infecting another (should) negate the issue.

Plus there are preventative measures to prevent transmission? Heck I giveaway condoms during the school year, just because people don’t think about getting tested.

[letstalkaboutaids]

1) Yes it does imply that they know, which is why it's logically bad policy, since it encourages people to not know so that they can never be criminalization. This is particularly true in high risk communities, especially high risk communities where the ability to turn down sex is not an inherent option. Criminalization of non-disclosure has been shown to lead to less testing and less treatment--the opposite of good public health policy.

2) HIV criminalization laws often do not care if sex was involve. A First Nations man in Canada was arrested under one for spitting on a cop when he was positive. Another man was arrested for getting his blood on a cop who had been beating him. The law, like you, only cares about serophobia not the context for it.

3) Which ties into your last point about condoms--HIV criminalization also doesn't care if condoms were used or even of transmission occurred. People have been arrested (and jailed) under such laws for sex with condoms or sex where no seroconversion happened. You can't support these laws and pretend that it's fine if people just use condoms, since people (predominantly black and Latino men) have been jailed under then despite condom use and no transmission.

[sobercommunist]

then again, is anyone really surprised that a terf’s first response to an HIV+ man saying “you accused me of rape because i talked about having sex with my ex-girlfriend” is “wait, hold up, did his ex KNOW he was HIV+???? that would definitely be rape, if not attempted murder.”

anyway, @getoffmyastroterf, yes my ex was aware of my status you stupid fuck

[getoffmyastroturf]

Fuck you asshole! I was raped in the 80s when all this shit hit mainstream media. So excuse fucking me if my response was “did they know” because MY news was full of women who DIDN’T know and DIED. You sanctimonious piece of shit, I’m not in the goddamn mood.

[sobercommunist]

“fuck you asshole! i was raped in the 80s when the mainstream media was full of fear-mongering homophobia! so excuse fucking me if my response was the same homophobic stigmatizing garbage that always comes up when terfs talk about HIV!”

is anybody really surprised

[getoffmyastroturf]

I see you missed the whole “women didn’t know and they died” bit, which was the point I was making. That straight men more or less made a game out’ve infecting women for shits and giggles. That’s the news I’m talking about asshole!

[sobercommunist]

“That straight men more or less made a game out’ve infecting women for shits and giggles. That’s the news I’m talking about asshole!”

the same homophobic stigmatizing garbage that always comes up when terfs talk about HIV. honestly, i hope you fucking die so painfully you have nooo idea.

[radical-pharah]

I am a lesbian and I agree with @getoffmyastroterf. Men (and women) have to tell their partners they are infected. If not, it is rape. It is pretty well known that very few people would consent to a life threatening disease. I don’t know the circumstance in which she addressed it, but I know plenty of men that defend other men who infect women without informing the women of their condition. (If this a particular instance just seemed really cruel, feel free to say so. ) Anyone with an STD needs to inform sexual partners of their condition(s). I hate that the HIV/AIDS thing reflects negatively on homosexual and bi men, but the increased rates and death rates came from individuals not informing other individuals (whether or not the intent to deceive was there).

[letstalkaboutaids]

Actually, the increased rates of transmission tend to come from the following places:

1) Tons of fucking stigma against HIV+ people--stigma that you and many others encourage--which keeps HIV+ people from connecting with communities, resources, etc, etc, etc. 

2) Less information and activism in the public eye about HIV/AIDS, which means people are less informed and less able to make their own risk management decisions

3) Vulnerable populations are unable to access medication, which allows for the virus to become undetectable (and therefore unable to be passed on)

4) HIV criminalization of non-disclosure--the very thing that you are arguing for--is bad on many, many levels but it is particularly bad public health policy since it actively encourages high risk communities (which include poor women! women of color! undocumented women! not just men) to not learn their status so that they can’t be jailed for it

Not one of those is “too many people aren’t disclosing to partners”. If you genuinely care about non-disclosure, the kind of arguments you’re making are exactly the kind of arguments that increase stigma and keep HIV+ people from being safe enough to disclose (among other factors). If you want all HIV+ to disclose at all times, you need to support policy and culture that makes that a safe, reasonable choice for HIV+ people to make. 

[yahoonewsphotos]

The graying of AIDS – Stories from an aging pandemic

Wherever people have access to lifesaving treatment, what was once thought impossible has become increasingly common: people with HIV/AIDS are living into their 50s, 60s, and beyond. As of 2015, half of all people living with HIV in the United States are age 50 or older, and by 2020 that percentage is expected to rise to 70%. More than 3 million people age 50+ are thought to be living positive in Sub-Saharan Africa alone, a number that could triple by 2040.

Ageist beliefs about who is at risk for HIV regularly get in the way of potentially life-saving information being shared with so-called “older adults.” (When tracking HIV/AIDS statistics, The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention defines people over age 50 as “older adults.”) Here in the U.S., people age 50 and older are more likely to be diagnosed with HIV later in their disease progression towards AIDS than their younger counterparts; as a result, older adults often start treatment late and regularly suffer from more HIV-related health problems. Again, ageism plays a role: whether because of lack of training or cultural taboos and social discomfort, health care providers are less likely to ask their older patients about their sex lives or substance use, and are less likely to test those patients for HIV.

Around the world, HIV/AIDS data collection often stops at age 49, so the numbers we have are often estimates based on projections grounded in data gathered on younger positive adults. What we know with certainty is that the need for aging-related HIV/AIDS services will continue to grow as future generations have the opportunity to age with the virus. But there are a lot of questions that need answers: What new medical challenges will arise from decades of living with HIV/AIDS, prolonged use of antiviral medications, and aging itself? What kind of support will HIV-positive older adults need in the long-term? What are we doing to prevent new HIV transmissions among adults later in life? And how can we best take advantage of the wealth of experience, passion, and insights this pioneering generation has to share?

______________________

The Graying of AIDS is a collaborative documentary project created by visual journalist Katja Heinemann and health educator Naomi Schegloff. For five years the team has worked to create media stories, multimedia art installations, innovative public health awareness campaigns with NGO partners, and educational materials that engage diverse audiences. The on-going “Stories from an Aging Pandemic” project is a participatory documentary installation and online archive. The Graying of AIDS team works with HIV-positive adults aged 50+ in a pop-up photo studio and interview station, creating a collective portrait of the first generation of adults able to grow “old” with HIV/AIDS. Thus far, more than 100 people representing 17 countries and 4 indigenous nations have participated in the project at the last two biennial International AIDS Conferences in the U.S. and Australia; the team hopes to travel to the next conference in South Africa in 2016 to complete the series for the 20th anniversary of HAART (highly active antiretroviral therapy), the multi-drug antiretroviral therapy that made aging with HIV a possibility for so many. Photography by Katja Heinemann/Interviews by Naomi Schegloff

See more images from The graying of AIDS and our other slideshows on Yahoo News!

[letstalkaboutaids]

I knew at a young age I was gay and based of what was being shown to me on TV I concluded in my mind that I would become HIV+. Delivering that first test result confirmed that.

Martez Smith, What Would an HIV Doula Do?

[letstalkaboutaids]

Learning that you are HIV+ is a series of moments over a lifetime.

Martez Smith, What Would an HIV Double Do? 

[sobercommunist]

You are HIV+ but have sex bareback? Why don't you have safe-sex only? I mean, you do know there's a chance of transmission of the virus to other people through unprotected sex, right?

because condoms suck and i dont pose a transmission risk lol why do you fucking care

[letstalkaboutaids]

I want to talk about the anon’s use of safe sex and equating it solely with condom use.

Look, condoms are great. They’re really effective for a lot of things and I think they should be free and accessible and explained to people and all that. Condoms are also just a safer sex tool.

Condoms are not the only way to have “safe sex” and your safer sex plan should not rely solely on condom use. There are so many ways and options to have “safe sex” that don’t involve condoms at all. The idea that “safe sex only” inherently means condoms and anything else is inherently unsafe is a fallacy that actually contributes to bad safe sex practices.

People should absolutely use condoms if they want to and no one should ever be pressured not to use condoms. But not using condoms is not the same as having unsafe sex. That’s true for everyone, including poz people.