Petrelis Files

World AIDS Day Never About Gays;

JAMA Slams Gays for Alleged Silence

In the 19 years of World AIDS Day commemorations and themes, gay men have never been the sole and primary focus, even though gays and men who have sex with men comprise the majority of AIDS cases in the United States and make up a substantial number of infections in global HIV stats.

World AIDS Day in 2000, when the theme was "AIDS: Men Make a Difference," came the closest to minimally addressing gay male needs in prevention and recognizing all gay men living with HIV.

There are only fleeting references in that year's materials that even say the words homosexual or men who have sex with men, and gay is omitted entirely, leaving much room for gay-specific improvement in how this global day of action embraces gays in the fight against AIDS. And let's not ignore President Bill Clinton's message that year marking the day failed to once say gay or MSM.

The silence about gays and AIDS from the organizers of World AIDS Day is cause for concern, at least to me, and should also be of importance to gay advocacy groups and HIV prevention workers. However, I don't get the sense that gay or AIDS organizations give a damn about 19 years of not making gays the theme, or a strong sub-context, for December 1.

On the eve of 2007's World AIDS Day, the Journal of the American Medical Association is running an article by three leading AIDS experts, all former CDC HIV/AIDS directors, in which they heavily criticize gay men for our alleged silence about the disease today.

The full text of the JAMA commentary is not available for free online, just an excerpt is, but today's Washington Times writes about it and starting with the headline, Silence on HIV/AIDS Tied to Epidemic's Rise, silence is the central theme.

From the arch-conservative Wash Times:

An HIV/AIDS epidemic is re-emerging in the United States among homosexual and bisexual men who are no longer frightened about the deadly disease and are returning to sexual risk-taking behaviors, public health officials say in a medical journal article released today.

The "silence on this subject is nearly pervasive," [say the authors of the JAMA article].

Too bad the JAMA authors, after slamming the gay community and calling for us to break the supposed silence, didn't go one important step further and advocate that their colleagues who coordinate World AIDS Day themes and actions end their silence over gays and HIV.

I'd like to know how the authors define this silence and how they measure it. Do they want ACT UP-style demonstrations again? Are the authors saying the multi-billion dollar AIDS groups are the silent ones?

The Wash Times further reports:

During the 1980s, community leaders galvanized homosexual and bisexual men with the slogan "Silence equals death." But this year, "AIDS is simply not as frightening as it was," they wrote. AIDS antiviral treatments now allow HIV-positive men to live reasonably comfortable lives and "[y]ounger MSM have largely been spared the visible devastation of untreated HIV infection."

The authors called for public health and community leaders to step up calls for responsible sexual behavior and HIV/AIDS screening and testing.

Whenever I read such statements from the JAMA writers bemoaning that AIDS is no longer killing gays like it once did, and the authors have repeatedly expressed views essentially wringing their hands that the epidemic and dying have radically changed for the better, I believe they're are speaking in code.

What I believe they are actually saying is they want more gays to die disfiguring painful deaths, all so that HIV prevention messages can return to being fear-driven, and young gay men can experience the horrendous decimation of the 1980s and early 1990s. "If only we were able to return to the bad old days, HIV prevention for gays would be so much more easier," the JAMA authors seem to say.

Let me now praise the authors for endorsing an end to discrimination faced by gays and men who have sex with men, according to the Wash Times:

In addition, leaders "must call for the end of stigma toward MSM, which may mitigate the internalization of homophobia leading to sexual risk behavior" and "advocate for legal domestic partnerships as a way to promote stable, longer term MSM relationships," they said.

Yes, we should applaud this call from the JAMA writers. I only wish they had proposed using the resources and attention of World AIDS Day to also endorse stopping the stigma and promoting more legal protections for gay relationships.