undefined | Better HN

0 pointsFezzik5y ago0 comments

I truly was not trying to offend or trivialize anything: my only point, as best as I can distill it, is that people react irrationally and inappropriately to infectious diseases. And we need to work on that. This is not at all unique to HIV/AIDS, even though people suffering from AIDS have born the brunt of the actual suffering. If we can’t have open, rational discussions about HSV, how can we do the same with HIV?

Edit: grammar

0 comments

MiroF5y ago

I understand the point you were trying to get across. Many STIs have substantial stigma around them and it makes it harder to fight them.

I just want to caution you that making these forms of equivalences is a common tactic to derail and discount the impact of HIV or the experience of populations disproportionately harmed, in the same way that people derail discussions about the disproportionate killing of black people by police with statements like "why focus on black people? nobody should be killed by police."

I believe that you were not intending to do so, but I also hope that you understand and can be cognizant of that dynamic.

FezzikOP5y ago

MiroF - I (could not initially) reply to your comment directly, but that was a perfect analogy to make your point. I can definitely see how my first comment could be taken that way, and that was not at all my intention. As with many things, I gotta work on my contextual phrasing and presentation!

jojobas5y ago

I never understood the stigma part. Random sex exposes you to STI. IV drug use also exposes you to HIV and Hep B. It's fine to blame lung cancer on smoking (even though you can get lung cancer without it). It's however considered not fine to judge people for other risky choices. Go figure.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse