POZ Community Forums
Main Forums => Living With HIV => Topic started by: joemutt on January 03, 2011, 09:42:48 pm
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/04/nyregion/04hiv.html?hp
Interesting comments by Larry Kramer.
Have a Happy and Healthy New Year, Everyone.
-
“Everybody thinks all you need to take is one pill, which is just malarkey,” said Mr. Kramer, who is H.I.V.-positive. “Nobody takes one pill. I mean, I take like 10.”
(sighs, rolls eyes).
-
“Everybody thinks all you need to take is one pill, which is just malarkey,” said Mr. Kramer, who is H.I.V.-positive. “Nobody takes one pill. I mean, I take like 10.”
(sighs, rolls eyes).
You should put Mr. Kramer on Ignore.
-
“Everybody thinks all you need to take is one pill, which is just malarkey,” said Mr. Kramer, who is H.I.V.-positive. “Nobody takes one pill. I mean, I take like 10.”
(sighs, rolls eyes).
It is so obvious that you have your head so far up your ass that you have no idea what the fuck is going on. When will you realize that everyone is not as lucking as you concerning how HIV has effected their lives. Why you constantly berate others who have a different experience or opinion is beyond me!!!
modified for spelling error
-
WTF, I could be the poster boy of hiv treatment with cd 4 1485 . Truth is I take 8 medications, 5 of which are for side effects.
I have osteopenia, muscle and cognitive trauma. You might do well at the start of treatment and I wish
you will continue to do well but you cannot deny or try to ridicule other people's experience. It might be useful to you one day.
modified for recount of # of meds
-
Yeah, WTF....I think most all of us are a tad baffled at your post there, buddy.
Hell...in a certain way, I personally feel like I owe a bit of my life to ol' man Kramer.
-
i missed what ad is the link refering to?
-
Hell...in a certain way, I personally feel like I owe a bit of my life to ol' man Kramer.
We all owe a little of our lives to many great AIDS activists, both famous and not. HIV is not a sprint, but a marathon, where slow and steady wins the race. The losers are those who are grateful, for their good fortune, while ignoring those less fortunate. The cruel are those who would demean another for their lot in life. The real winners are those who can maintain a steady pace, while holding up others.
-
i missed what ad is the link refering to?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0ANiu3YdJg
-
doh, found it... that one? i thought we already saw that one... sure sure, i am indeed scared, wish i had been scared before i exposed myself
-
It is so obvious that you have your head so far up your ass that you have no idea what the fuck is going on. When will you realize that everyone is not as lucking as you concerning how HIV has effects their lives. Why you constantly berate others who have a different experience or opinion is beyond me!!!
lol, what? Normally, I prefer not to give you the time of day, but I think my original comment needs some clarification: There is only one thing which is liable to make educated youngsters discount the reality of HIV, and thats when we try to augment it with lies. In this case, we should not warn kids that "no one is on one pill a day", when 80% of newly treated people are in fact on one pill a day and more single treatment doses are in the pipeline.
As for "not everyone being as lucky as me"...I'm sorry, but you really don't know my position. I won't enter the HIV victimization olympics, but I don't think I've had a particularly easy go of it compared to other newbies, and I'm well aware of what the future might hold. When I describe myself as lucky, its but only because I have an appreciation for how bad things could be, and what others have gone through. This mentality is anything but oblivious to the situation others are in.
Maybe you're right though, maybe I have no idea "what the fuck is going" on because "my head is up my ass". We should keep asking septagenarians and female advertising executives why 20 something gay men keep getting infected. Clearly THEY are the ones with their fingers on the pulse of Young Gay America. Then, when infection rates fail to to slow, we can have a self-congratulatory round of "its because they don't listen to us" before starting the cycle over again. Its such a perfect combination! The Williamsburg crowd gets their bareback sex, and the aging queer intellectuals get to keep their self-congratulatory worldview! Who would've thought that old and young could exist in such harmony, contributing to one another's feedback loop? Its such beautiful symbiosis!
-
We should keep asking septagenarians and female advertising executives why 20 something gay men keep getting infected. Clearly THEY are the ones with their fingers on the pulse of Young Gay America. Then, when infection rates fail to to slow, we can have a self-congratulatory round of "its because they don't listen to us" before starting the cycle over again. Its such a perfect combination! The Williamsburg crowd gets their bareback sex, and the aging queer intellectuals get to keep their self-congratulatory worldview! Who would've thought that old and young could exist in such harmony, contributing to one another's feedback loop? Its such beautiful symbiosis!
My question is why couldn't that have been your original response, rather than this:
“Everybody thinks all you need to take is one pill, which is just malarkey,” said Mr. Kramer, who is H.I.V.-positive. “Nobody takes one pill. I mean, I take like 10.”
(sighs, rolls eyes).
-
My dear Woods, you are still far more generous and measured than I. I still find lines like...
"We should keep asking septagenarians and female advertising executives why 20 something gay men keep getting infected. Clearly THEY are the ones with their fingers on the pulse of Young Gay America."
...more than a little difficult to tolerate gracefully.
-
Im all for clarity but asking wtf to write more is pure torture ... shudder .
-
another quote also from kramer makes a lot of sense. nice thread though
“It’s about time,” Larry Kramer, the writer and a founder of Act Up, wrote in an e-mail to friends and fellow activists after seeing the spot. “This ad is honest and true and scary, all of which it should be. H.I.V. is scary, and all attempts to curtail it via lily-livered nicey-nicey ‘prevention’ tactics have failed.”
-
There is only one thing which is liable to make educated youngsters discount the reality of HIV, and thats when we try to augment it with lies. In this case, we should not warn kids that "no one is on one pill a day", when 80% of newly treated people are in fact on one pill a day and more single treatment doses are in the pipeline.
Its such a perfect combination! The Williamsburg crowd gets their bareback sex, and the aging queer intellectuals get to keep their self-congratulatory worldview! Who would've thought that old and young could exist in such harmony, contributing to one another's feedback loop? Its such beautiful symbiosis!
What I find interesting about your posts, is that you state your opinion as if it were fact and then act surprised when others do not agree with your "facts". However, what I find most offensive, is your constantly alluding to the fact that just because some of us are LTS, that somehow we don't understand HIV. How fucking insensitive can you get.
You think that LTS are aging queer intellectuals, and we sit around congratulating ourselves on the state of HIV? You are damn right we do, because WE ARE THE ONES WHO CREATED IT ALL and you should be forever grateful to the multitudes who died, so you could boast about your once a day dosing. What you seem unable to recognize is that LTS did what we did, because we loved the people who were dying. We did it out of a sense of love and duty, not for accolades or even recognition. It was something we wanted and need to do, for so many reasons, that you will never comprehend.
So I'm sorry if you don't like that we can't condense HIV into a sound bite for you, but at least show some respect for the people who allow you to live with HIV the way you can. You may also try the emotions of compassion and empathy at some point and then, maybe, you will understand what so many of us are trying to do.
-
There is only one thing which is liable to make educated youngsters discount the reality of HIV, and thats when we try to augment it with lies. In this case, we should not warn kids that "no one is on one pill a day", when 80% of newly treated people are in fact on one pill a day and more single treatment doses are in the pipeline.
Which, of course, does not include a count of any of the peripheral medications that end up creeping into your daily life routine. Far from a septagenarian and not one to classify myself as an aging queer intellectual, nevertheless I have already found myself having to take about a dozen pills a day to keep the ship afloat. Everything from blood meds to good old Immodium. It has been suspected by my docs that I may have had a mild stroke at one point. Kramer is still right.
-
One pill a day, right? So no problems? Like Sustiva-related depression? Or doesn't that slight bump in many person's medical road, yours included, count?
Like it or not, you are one of us. And as your journey is only starting, I can't imagine it helps significantly to cut off the very people who could help you the most, in this online community.
Which is why most of the persons you ceremoniously and vociferously placed on "ignore" have not dont the same in return. WTF, indeed. Perhaps you can consider these "teachable moments" and take a place among the grownups.
-
I am not sure what kind of forum this is but the kind of response given to member "wtfimpoz" is abhorrent.
It is his experience and his opinion. Why do the moderators here allow another member to post such inflammatory statements such as:
"It is so obvious that you have your head so far up your ass that you have no idea what the fuck is going on. When will you realize that everyone is not as lucking as you concerning how HIV has effects their lives. Why you constantly berate others who have a different experience or opinion is beyond me!!!"
This seems pretty over the top and should be discouraged.
I am not interested to be drawn into this petty dispute and I won't and will have to think twice about coming here for information when this is the kind of "dialogue" that seems to be tolerated.
Sad.
-
Fear and HIV Prevention Shouldn't Mix
Why the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene's Frightening New Public Service Announcement Geared Toward Gay Men Does More Harm Than Good
http://www.thebody.com/content/news/art59938.html
Think one part The Walking Dead, one part CSI and a dash of any anti-gay public service announcement (PSA) from the 1950s, and that pretty much sums up "It's Never Just HIV," the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (NYC DOHMH)'s newest PSA. In an attempt to raise HIV awareness among young men who have sex with men (MSM), this eerie and explicit PSA stresses that having HIV can make one more susceptible to developing bone loss, dementia and anal cancer.
View the PSA below:
Since its Dec. 7 television debut, "It's Never Just HIV" instantly polarized the HIV and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) communities. High profile advocates -- including Larry Kramer and Gay Men of African Descent (GMAD)'s Tokes Osubu -- have hailed this as a much-needed wake-up call for gay men. Kramer wrote, in a blog for ACT UP's Web site, "It's about time. This ad is honest and true and scary, all of which it should be. HIV is scary and all attempts to curtail it via lily-livered nicey-nicey 'prevention' tactics have failed." Osubu told NBC New York, "We're getting to the point where HIV is becoming the norm. It's okay, you can just take one pill and it will disappear. But that's not the reality."
Advertisement
Others are calling it a serious prevention failure. On Dec. 13, New York City's Gay Men's Health Crisis (GMHC) and the media advocacy organization Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) called for the ad to be pulled from television because it is "counterproductive" and "sensationalistic." The NYC DOHMH refused GMHC and GLAAD's request and plans on playing the ad throughout the month of December and into mid-January. When asked about NYC DOHMH's decision, Monica Sweeney, M.D., the assistant commissioner for the NYC DOHMH's Bureau of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control told FishbowlNY, "Silence is no solution."
The use of fear is not new when it comes to HIV prevention, and when looking at how far (or not far) we have come in the past 30 years, I can definitely understand why the NYC DOHMH may have relied on scare tactics to grab people's attention. New HIV diagnosis rates among MSM under the age of 30 are up 50 percent in the past eight years. Yes, that's a serious problem.
I also understand that a lot has changed since the disease was once called GRID (gay-related immunodeficiency disease): AIDS doesn't deplete social circles anymore thanks to antiretrovirals; the face of the disease has become more inclusive over the years; and Big Pharma markets living with HIV as painless and as easy as popping a pill every day. And despite everything we know about this disease and how to prevent it, we are still seeing naive and nonchalant attitudes among young men when it comes to HIV. Clearly, we have a lot more work to do.
But many of the large, national LGBT organizations -- the ones that have the most visibility, influence and funding -- need to take some responsibility for why HIV has fallen off their own community's radar as well. While some of these groups will occasionally lend a hand to HIV/AIDS organizations when it's convenient, they essentially have turned their backs on the epidemic and have taken up more "relatable" platform issues, such as marriage equality, adoption and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." And while I understand that the stigma of the early days has helped shape homophobia and misconceptions about gay people, now is the time for LGBT people to let go of that hang-up and re-own this epidemic as if it's 1985. HIV is still a gay disease.
But even if the kids just don't get it and would rather remain fixated on Lady Gaga and Beyoncé, or even if Gay Inc. is too busy playing respectability politics with straight America, that doesn't justify what the NYC DOHMH has done.
This PSA is not the answer. Not even close.
First, it's misleading. The ad simplifies the science around the association between HIV and developing other ailments, such as dementia and osteoporosis, by making it seem as if these things are a definite and will happen immediately after being diagnosed. These are diseases that may not happen at all and if they do, most likely they will occur much later in life. It's not that plausible that a 28-year-old, HIV-positive man will go dancing at Splash on a Wednesday night and look down to see that his femur has snapped in half. Not to mention, this could actually deter people from wanting to get tested since the ad claims that antiretrovirals don't necessarily stop one from developing these diseases. Ignorance for many is bliss, especially if it seems as if modern medicine won't stop one's anus from being riddled with bloody sores or one's brain from rotting.
Second, the men in the ad look utterly miserable and ashamed of being who they are. By demonizing gay sex, being gay and being HIV positive, this PSA only pushes HIV/AIDS back into the closet -- something the NYC DOHMH claims it doesn't want to do. How does this empower anyone to take responsibility and respect himself enough to use a condom? How does this lessen the stigma around HIV? I fear this ad will just feed into the fatalistic and self-hating mentality that some young gay men have: Why use condoms when I am destined to have HIV because I am gay?
Most importantly, this ad is problematic because it's completely insensitive to the fear that many LGBT people -- not just in New York City, but across the country -- face on a daily basis by being out with their sexual orientation or gender identity. There is the fear among some that they could lose everything because they can be legally fired in the state in which they live for being gay. Or the sheer panic that overcomes many transgender people when they walk out their front door because of the harsh reality that they may never make it back home alive. Or that menacing pit that lives in the stomachs of our LGBT youth when they pull up to school and realize that they have to face another day of torment.
We live in a society that has more contempt, than it does compassion for the LGBT community.
Advertisement
This October, it was that exact sentiment that Joseph Jefferson, a 26-year-old, Brooklyn HIV/AIDS advocate, conveyed on his Facebook page right before he hanged himself. He wrote, "I could not bear the burden of living as a gay man of color in a world grown cold and hateful towards those of us who live and love differently than the so-called 'social mainstream.'"
This PSA, however unintentionally, plays into that legacy of hate.
And even though the NYC DOHMH uses fear to raise awareness around other health issues, such as smoking, influenza and binge drinking, it must be noted that HIV and sexual orientation carry a hell of a lot more cultural, political and emotional weight than having one too many cosmos and not getting a flu shot. And while it's not the NYC DOHMH's job to unpack and sort through all of the LGBT community's "baggage," the agency does have a responsibility to be somewhat culturally competent. Perhaps if it had been more aware, we would have seen messages about other barriers to condom use, such as homelessness, low self-esteem, sex work, economic instability, substance abuse and a lack of condom negotiation skills.
Remember, HIV is never just about complacency.
Most likely, this campaign will fail, especially since numerous studies have found that fear-based campaigns don't really alter people's behavior in the long run. But even if "It's Never Just HIV" were to be successful at doing what it set out to do -- scaring the shit out of gay men in order to get them to use condoms -- that public health win would come at a high personal price. Because to sell HIV prevention using fear (as opposed to using love and validation), does nothing but inflict more unnecessary trauma upon the same vulnerable and at-risk community that the NYC DOHMH claims it wants to protect.
And in the end, that's a lose-lose for all of us.
Kellee Terrell is the news editor for TheBody.com and TheBodyPro. The views reflected in this piece do not necessarily reflect the views of TheBody.com itself.
-
I'm confused why you posted in the other thread on this topic a few minutes ago and then decided to make an entirely new thread.
-
No one method of prevention will work in "the long term." I think it is more worthwhile to stack up the "short term" efforts, including fear, than to imagine one singular grand design as the answer.
-
I am not sure what kind of forum this is but the kind of response given to member "wtfimpoz" is abhorrent.
As I am sure you have reviewed the posting history of the persons you reference, you can understand the context of the discussion. I would not dream of belittling your intellect by assuming you have not done this.
I am very happy that you personally have had zero side effects from your daily regimen. I am a little disturbed that you wish to silence those who have problems with the exact same drugs.
WTF has had major issues resulting from the CNS side effects of his regimen, which makes his fierce denial regarding the scope of the pandemic and it's treatments irritating as well as puzzling.
What sort of forum is this? Well, stick around and participate. In your own words, preferably. Not to compare apples and oranges, but I have read many of thebody's forums, and this pales in comparison to the plethora of misinformation, disinformation, and downright trolling that goes virtually unchecked over there.
But to each his own.
-
I believe that short-term efforts tailored for particular audiences will have greater impact than some grand scheme
Look where abstinence only has gotten us.
Regarding the fear factor, it does help to some degree. It worked very well in the 80s and 90s, when people were really dropping like flies.
Also, I rather like the take NYC has on HIV, because, after living with it for more than 25 years, I can honestly tell you it is never "just HIV."
Edited to add:
Since the duplicate threads have been merged, and given the context now included in this single thread, I would add this:
Larry Kramer, whom I met once and who can be a royal pain in the ass, is absolutely correct on two things.
The first is very few people will live their lives on one pill. I take nine pills a day, not counting supplements, to keep the old bod functioning and me out of the grave.
Even those taking Atripla will find themselves with additional meds as time goes by.
Second, the sugary sweet school of HIV education has failed us miserably. I think a dose of reality would do people a world of good.
HUGS,
Mark
-
I'm merging this back into the other thread. Please don't start new threads on the same topic.
Thanks,
David
-
What I find interesting about your posts, is that you state your opinion as if it were fact and then act surprised when others do not agree with your "facts". However, what I find most offensive, is your constantly alluding to the fact that just because some of us are LTS, that somehow we don't understand HIV. How fucking insensitive can you get.
You think that LTS are aging queer intellectuals, and we sit around congratulating ourselves on the state of HIV? You are damn right we do, because WE ARE THE ONES WHO CREATED IT ALL and you should be forever grateful to the multitudes who died, so you could boast about your once a day dosing. What you seem unable to recognize is that LTS did what we did, because we loved the people who were dying. We did it out of a sense of love and duty, not for accolades or even recognition. It was something we wanted and need to do, for so many reasons, that you will never comprehend.
So I'm sorry if you don't like that we can't condense HIV into a sound bite for you, but at least show some respect for the people who allow you to live with HIV the way you can. You may also try the emotions of compassion and empathy at some point and then, maybe, you will understand what so many of us are trying to do.
Joe, I never said anything about LTS. I admire and value many LTS. Not you of course, but many. My post has nothing to do with LTS though, and its only your desire to call out to the aidsmeds cartel by misquoting me which has even brought up the group. What I said was that we shouldn't petition Larry Kramer ("a septagenarian") to discuss what young gay men need to hear. This isn't rocket science. We wouldn't dream of asking New Yorkers why Californians build their homes in areas prone to wildfires. It goes without saying that 50 year olds have little to contribute regarding the issue of why 22 year olds can't graduate college in four years. For some reason, in the topsy-turvy world of HIV prevention, we seem to solicit the opinions of everyone but the people we're supposedly trying to educate.
Joe, 99% of what you write is worthless, it really is. Its melodramatic, self-centered and just plain malicious. You manipulate emotions, but you never inspire or teach. Everything is always about you, all the time. I've had you on block for so long that I'd almost forgotten you were alive. I would've ignored your prattle here but experience has taught me that you can't let sleeping dogs lie. You absolutely had to jump a discussion I was having and attack me for things I never said. I didn't want to see you hijack yet another thread and turn it into a discussion of how I've victimized you with things I never said. What is it that causes you to do this? "Compassion"? "Empathy"? "What you're trying to do"? "Boasting about once a day dosing"? WTF are you even talking about? Joe, my points were that lying to uninfected 20 somethings makes them doubt the truths we tell them. My second point was that we shouldn't be asking 70 year olds about what 20 year olds think. These are reasonable concerns to anyone. What possible value is there in anything that you've written, but your attempt to tear me down? Get a life dude.
-
Joe, I never said anything about LTS. I admire and value many LTS. Not you of course, but many. My post has nothing to do with LTS though, and its only your desire to call out to the aidsmeds cartel by misquoting me which has even brought up the group. What I said was that we shouldn't petition Larry Kramer ("a septagenarian") to discuss what young gay men need to hear. This isn't rocket science. We wouldn't dream of asking New Yorkers why Californians build their homes in areas prone to wildfires. It goes without saying that 50 year olds have little to contribute regarding the issue of why 22 year olds can't graduate college in four years. For some reason, in the topsy-turvy world of HIV prevention, we seem to solicit the opinions of everyone but the people we're supposedly trying to educate.
Joe, 99% of what you write is worthless, it really is. Its melodramatic, self-centered and just plain malicious. You manipulate emotions, but you never inspire or teach. Everything is always about you, all the time. I've had you on block for so long that I'd almost forgotten you were alive. I would've ignored your prattle here but experience has taught me that you can't let sleeping dogs lie. You absolutely had to jump a discussion I was having and attack me for things I never said. I didn't want to see you hijack yet another thread and turn it into a discussion of how I've victimized you with things I never said. What is it that causes you to do this? "Compassion"? "Empathy"? "What you're trying to do"? "Boasting about once a day dosing"? WTF are you even talking about? Joe, my points were that lying to uninfected 20 somethings makes them doubt the truths we tell them. My second point was that we shouldn't be asking 70 year olds about what 20 year olds think. These are reasonable concerns to anyone. What possible value is there in anything that you've written, but your attempt to tear me down? Get a life dude.
Quoted to save.
-
You need to pull up a comfortable desk and get schooled, WTF. You are addressing a very well regarded member of these forums and he deserves more respect.
I've already read enough of your smarmy posts to conclude that I'd rather have one of him than 100 of the likes of you.
I find it extrememly telling that you appear to have dismissed some of the very voices who could benefit you the most.
-
I'm glad wtf exposed himself to be the sad creature he is , don't sweat it Joe , he is not worth your time .
-
My apologies Mr. Evans. I thought the article I posted, "Fear and HIV Prevention Shouldn't Mix" was well written and eloquent enough to stand on it's own. Note taken.
I normally would never get involved with this kind of hyperbole and tit for tat crap but it's the rebel in me that has to come out for this young member wtfimpoz. I think you folks should lighten up on him and act like adults. I will add this last quote in this thread from a singer/songwriter from my day:
"Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don't criticize
What you can't understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly agin'.
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin'."
-
Joe, I never said anything about LTS. I admire and value many LTS. Not you of course, but many. My post has nothing to do with LTS though, and its only your desire to call out to the aidsmeds cartel by misquoting me which has even brought up the group.
Joe, 99% of what you write is worthless, it really is. Its melodramatic, self-centered and just plain malicious. You manipulate emotions, but you never inspire or teach. Everything is always about you, all the time. I've had you on block for so long that I'd almost forgotten you were alive. I would've ignored your prattle here but experience has taught me that you can't let sleeping dogs lie.
Get a life dude.
You are so amazingly disrespectful. And you can cry "AIDS Meds Mafia", "Cartel", "Cabal", or "Junta" all you want; we will come to each other's defense when someone who barely knows what he's saying decides to attack a member of a community that we care about. When you first came on board we supported you. I recall myself, Ann, and Phil --to name a few-- being there for you when you were falling apart, but you have chosen to act like a brat and believe that "ignoring" people is the way to go.
Stop playing victim and act with a little class and maturity. And please let this be your last attack on Joe; you will not get any affection from anyone around here if you keep at it.
To this Wonderful person who asked why WTF had been given such a harsh response by other members, I believe that this should give you enough of an example of what this young man is about. I seriously wonder why he even bothers to come round here anyway.
-
You need to pull up a comfortable desk and get schooled, WTF. You are addressing a very well regarded member of these forums and he deserves more respect.
I've already read enough of your smarmy posts to conclude that I'd rather have one of him than 100 of the likes of you.
I find it extrememly telling that you appear to have dismissed some of the very voices who could benefit you the most.
That's the thing, isn't it? Yes when serious side effects emerge, those very /ignored/ voices are often the first ones to supply information and even support.
It's a good symptom of the issues with HIV prevention. People silence the voices that they really need to hear, because it isn't what they want to believe.
-
Joe, I never said anything about LTS. I admire and value many LTS. Not you of course, but many. My post has nothing to do with LTS though, and its only your desire to call out to the aidsmeds cartel by misquoting me which has even brought up the group. What I said was that we shouldn't petition Larry Kramer ("a septagenarian") to discuss what young gay men need to hear. This isn't rocket science. We wouldn't dream of asking New Yorkers why Californians build their homes in areas prone to wildfires. It goes without saying that 50 year olds have little to contribute regarding the issue of why 22 year olds can't graduate college in four years. For some reason, in the topsy-turvy world of HIV prevention, we seem to solicit the opinions of everyone but the people we're supposedly trying to educate.
Joe, 99% of what you write is worthless, it really is. Its melodramatic, self-centered and just plain malicious. You manipulate emotions, but you never inspire or teach. Everything is always about you, all the time. I've had you on block for so long that I'd almost forgotten you were alive. I would've ignored your prattle here but experience has taught me that you can't let sleeping dogs lie. You absolutely had to jump a discussion I was having and attack me for things I never said. I didn't want to see you hijack yet another thread and turn it into a discussion of how I've victimized you with things I never said. What is it that causes you to do this? "Compassion"? "Empathy"? "What you're trying to do"? "Boasting about once a day dosing"? WTF are you even talking about? Joe, my points were that lying to uninfected 20 somethings makes them doubt the truths we tell them. My second point was that we shouldn't be asking 70 year olds about what 20 year olds think. These are reasonable concerns to anyone. What possible value is there in anything that you've written, but your attempt to tear me down? Get a life dude.
I don't care if you like me, because I know what I do, makes a difference to an awful lot of people. My point to you remains that if you think you can develop prevention messages that will work, then go for it. Just what exactly do you think the HIV community has been trying to do with 30 years of prevention messages. We have tried almost every combination of emotions, but humans are just too fluid to all be reached by the same messages. So rather than my boring you with my worthless thoughts, why don't you outline for us, the prevention messages you would develop for 300 million Americans? Either put up or STFU.
-
Joe, I never said anything about LTS. I admire and value many LTS. Not you of course, but many. My post has nothing to do with LTS though, and its only your desire to call out to the aidsmeds cartel by misquoting me which has even brought up the group. What I said was that we shouldn't petition Larry Kramer ("a septagenarian") to discuss what young gay men need to hear. This isn't rocket science. We wouldn't dream of asking New Yorkers why Californians build their homes in areas prone to wildfires. It goes without saying that 50 year olds have little to contribute regarding the issue of why 22 year olds can't graduate college in four years. For some reason, in the topsy-turvy world of HIV prevention, we seem to solicit the opinions of everyone but the people we're supposedly trying to educate.
Joe, 99% of what you write is worthless, it really is. Its melodramatic, self-centered and just plain malicious. You manipulate emotions, but you never inspire or teach. Everything is always about you, all the time. I've had you on block for so long that I'd almost forgotten you were alive. I would've ignored your prattle here but experience has taught me that you can't let sleeping dogs lie. You absolutely had to jump a discussion I was having and attack me for things I never said. I didn't want to see you hijack yet another thread and turn it into a discussion of how I've victimized you with things I never said. What is it that causes you to do this? "Compassion"? "Empathy"? "What you're trying to do"? "Boasting about once a day dosing"? WTF are you even talking about? Joe, my points were that lying to uninfected 20 somethings makes them doubt the truths we tell them. My second point was that we shouldn't be asking 70 year olds about what 20 year olds think. These are reasonable concerns to anyone. What possible value is there in anything that you've written, but your attempt to tear me down? Get a life dude.
And when you made your "rolls eyes" comment above you didn't think you would garner the response you pretend not to want? I don't buy it... We all know what your intentions were here, perhaps it is you who needs to get a life. And do us all a favor, get off Joe's back while doing so.
DUDE!
-
I doubt the ad is going to change sexual behavior. If someone isn't afraid of AIDS are they really going to be afraid of being at a "higher risk" for osteoporosis or anal cancer?
The ad is almost comical to me: "Oh, I don't want to get AIDS because that might lead to brittle bones!"
-
I doubt the ad is going to change sexual behavior. If someone isn't afraid of AIDS are they really going to be afraid of being at a "higher risk" for osteoporosis or anal cancer?
The ad is almost comical to me: "Oh, I don't want to get AIDS because that might lead to brittle bones!"
I think part of the problem is the majority of people who turned up poz in the past decade have never seen AIDS.
HUGS,
Mark
-
I doubt the ad is going to change sexual behavior. If someone isn't afraid of AIDS are they really going to be afraid of being at a "higher risk" for osteoporosis or anal cancer?
The ad is almost comical to me: "Oh, I don't want to get AIDS because that might lead to brittle bones!"
So what works? We have, as a community, done such a great job of promoting HIV as No Big Deal that I am clueless as to what, exactly, would be effective at preventing it.
-
does anyone have any numbers on what market share Atripla holds? I imagine that that once-a-day pill actually works for a number of people according to the data.
“Everybody thinks all you need to take is one pill, which is just malarkey,” said Mr. Kramer, who is H.I.V.-positive. “Nobody takes one pill. I mean, I take like 10.”
Mr. Kramer actually did speak with some hyperbole stating that "nobody" takes just 1 pill as that is patently not true. He does seem to ignore the wide range of experiences that people with HIV have and seems to only speak from his own experience. While some of us take 10 pills a day, others (like me) only take 3 (well 4 if you count the acyclovir), and still others take just 1.
Thankfully in the last 20 yrs great strides have been made and people are able to physically handle HIV much better than in the past because of the improved medications. I know that I have been quite surprised to meet as many people I have at my ASO who take Atripla, still work, and have very few, if any, side effects. (I don't denigrate their experience just because I wasn't as "lucky". then again thanks to the AZT, since I'm still alive, I'm luckier than my dead friends and partners so I guess it's all relative.) Such strides have been made that even the gov't is considering changes to disability requirements as someone is more likely today to be diagnosed with AIDS, receive proper treatment, and go back to their "regular" way of life instead being counseled on their impending death as it was in the past.
I doubt the ad is going to change sexual behavior. If someone isn't afraid of AIDS are they really going to be afraid of being at a "higher risk" for osteoporosis or anal cancer?
oh but I do think it works - some. Just like the more "gentle" advertisements work too. Someone talked earlier about what the message should be. Well, it should be all of the above! Sometimes honey works, and sometimes vinegar works, especially when you're reaching out to the masses and not one-on-one. And sadly, a lot of the time neither works; but occassionaly both work.
-
So what works? We have, as a community, done such a great job of promoting HIV as No Big Deal that I am clueless as to what, exactly, would be effective at preventing it.
I don't have the answers but it seems to me if you want to change the sexual behavior of young people you need to make the consequences more about something they care about, like sex. I know HIV+ people would flip out but how about an ad where you tell young gays that the meds cause chronic diarrhea and reminded them that no one wants to fuck the guy who is going to cover them in liquid shit. "Condoms not only prevent HIV they keep you from getting covered in shit."
Yes, I'm going over the top but you get the idea.
-
My guess is that if $750,000+ is being spent on an advertising campaign then it's because whoever is funding it has done the research.
And that research presumably shows that this particular message will resonate with the intended target demographic.
Focus group tested. Qualitative and quantitative. All that jazz.
The GMHC has a wasp up it's ass about the message? They may be right. Or they may be pissy because they're not being consulted. AIDS politics can be nasty politics.
Do shock tactics work? I dunno. Ask the Grim Reaper. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U219eUIZ7Qo)
MtD
-
I don't have the answers but it seems to me if you want to change the sexual behavior of young people you need to make the consequences more about something they care about, like sex. I know HIV+ people would flip out but how about an ad where you tell young gays that the meds cause chronic diarrhea and reminded them that no one wants to fuck the guy who is going to cover them in liquid shit. "Condoms not only prevent HIV they keep you from getting covered in shit."
Yes, I'm going over the top but you get the idea.
Actually that is a great idea. It's still fear-based, but it's a fear that manages to hit at an early and identifiable (not to mention common) impact of HIV, treated or untreated.
If you can get a person, young OR old, startled out of his/her reverie for an instant, then you have sown the seed. Fear does this. Disturbing images do this, humor does this.
So many ASO's think putting a dry facts sheet of info at the urinal in a gay bar is enough. My point is that it's not. Also, a waste of valuable real estate.
A close up of a hard penis with a condom on it. A masked superhero handing out condoms. graphic photos of shit-stained sheet, lipo, whatever. And KEEP switching it up.
I am always face-palming when I hear people say that such-and-such isn't "the way" to go about a problem, then offer nothing insofar as a solution in return. And all the time overlooking the obvious; that there is NO one way to prevent HIV. Using ALL the weapons in our collective media disposal, and knowing when to swap them out, is the key.
That takes a LOT of work, and probably more than a lot of money. Turns a comfy desk job into a grueling labor of love, with no nights or weekends off. Means getting and staying involved.
Sadly, HIV prevention is not a job for the lazy, the sick, or the tired. And sadly, the latter two have been holding the fort for way too long. And the first is happy to rest on those unearned laurels.
*edited to add:
Going "over the top" is the only logical first step in brainstorming. I am glad you went there :)
Also, it is both sad and telling that most of us actually having this conversation are ignored by the member who seems in most need of the information.
-
... that there is NO one way to prevent HIV. Using ALL the weapons in our collective media disposal, and knowing when to swap them out, is the key.
Amen to that!
-
I don't care if you like me, because I know what I do, makes a difference to an awful lot of people. My point to you remains that if you think you can develop prevention messages that will work, then go for it. Just what exactly do you think the HIV community has been trying to do with 30 years of prevention messages. We have tried almost every combination of emotions, but humans are just too fluid to all be reached by the same messages. So rather than my boring you with my worthless thoughts, why don't you outline for us, the prevention messages you would develop for 300 million Americans? Either put up or STFU.
First, I'd establish whether the ad's target audience really thinks HIV is an easy to manage disease. I suspect most kids these days don't, although let me volunteer that at 29 I'm pretty far removed from their mindset. Operating off the radical belief that they haven't missed 30 years of fear-based sex ed, horror stories about "super aids", that they're not blind to the physical side effects of HIV medications, I'd begin asking questions. "Why do you think you can trust the self-proclaimed serostatus of a stranger you meet on a website called barebackrealtime?" "What was it that lead you to believe you'd use a condom correctly, every time, when drunk?" If you didn't feel safe, why didn't you navigate your behavior towards safer activities?" "Did you wonder how you were going to pay for it?" What do you mean you haven't had sex?*" "Why did you think that a man you'd been with for three weeks was trustworthy enough to ditch condoms with?" "What do you mean you didn't know you could get HIV from a single unprotected encounter?"
I'd educate, as necessary, from there. The variety of answers might not fit comfortably into a 2 minute soundbite on television, but I think it'd be more effective than restating the obvious and expecting a different result.
Matty, you say that the campaign has done its research because its well funded. I personally feel that one doesn't necessarily follow the other. Kids these days know HIV is bad, they grew up with it in the background.
* http://voices.washingtonpost.com/checkup/2011/01/young_adults_self-reported_sex.html?hpid=topnews
-
.. Kids these days know HIV is bad, they grew up with it in the background.
* http://voices.washingtonpost.com/checkup/2011/01/young_adults_self-reported_sex.html?hpid=topnews
Is the linked article supposed to support your above statement?
If it's at all relating, I find it's actually the opposite.
"Of 14,000 people (whose mean age was about 22 years) included in a study published this morning in the journal Pediatrics, fully 10 percent of those who tested positive for one of three common STDs (chlamydia, gonorrhea trichomoniasis) reported they hadn't had sex during the previous 12 months. And 60 percent of that 10 percent said they'd never had sex at all."
-
It elaborates on why I'm asking them that they haven't had sex. The asterisk was supposed to draw your eye to the bottom.
-
Then isn't it just confirming a common tendency to deny or even lie even when facing a diagnosis of a STD? What does that have to do with the assumption that young adults "these days know HIV is bad"?
-
There's a miscommunication somewhere. I hold that young adults already know HIV is bad, that we need to understand why they are making choices that lead to it anyways. The fact that large swathes of youth seem to underestimate the fact that they are sexually active at all is an excellent place to start.
-
It just shows to me that people, younger or older, are perfectly capable of denying reality when it comes to STDs, a highly stigmatized group of diseases, or at least when being confronted with a diagnosis. It's after-the-fact, i.e., they have already been infected. So I still can't see how you can link it to your assertion that they (young adults) know HIV is bad, or even as a starting point of discussions.
-
It just shows to me that people, younger or older, are perfectly capable of denying reality when it comes to STDs, a highly stigmatized group of diseases, or at least when being confronted with a diagnosis. It's after-the-fact, i.e., they have already been infected. So I still can't see how you can link it to your assertion that they (young adults) know HIV is bad, or even as a starting point of discussions.
Careful. If YOU get Ignored, you will be having this conversation more or less alone :)
-
So I still can't see how you can link it to your assertion that they (young adults) know HIV is bad, or even as a starting point of discussions.
sure they do. On world aids day, an audience of 350 college students and 7 videos they had prepared for our video contest all thought that an HIV diagnosis was still a death sentence (lord, those vids didn't at all portray HIV awareness in the way that we had wanted LOL). So they know that it's bad.
Just like drugs, driving too fast, alcohol, STDs etc etc. They know all those things are "bad", but do they care? probably not and probably never will. Until we change the entire society's view of condomless sex (and good luck with that. the anti teen-pregnancy crowd has been trying to do that a lot longer that HIV activists), we're never going to solve the HIV infection problem either. (well, a vaccine sure would help; though it wouldn't stop the condomless sex.) Young adults understand that unsafe sex can result in HIV, pregnancy, and stds ... however, the odds of that are slim and that's what they're banking on. Just think how high the odds are of a female getting pregnant - and it doesn't stop the sex. The chance of getting HIV is even less of a gamble.
I think the only "solution" are all solutions. "Nice" ads, in-your-face ads, speakers, education programs, etc, etc. Every one of those methods will reach a few and each "few" adds up. and yes, sadly, until there's a vaccine or cure or a mass cultural change, nothing we can say or show will totally reach everyone. but that's nothing new either. every advertising agency in the world understands that. why do you think ads are rotated around all the time? Why are they "assuring" at times, and "radical" at others? Because all those ways bring in a few customers at a time - and that's all they can really hope for.
that's why it seems silly for those agencies and people to have complained about this ad campaign. it's just as legit and as viable as any other PSA. (just like our 10 pill a day, 3 pill a day or 1 pill day experiences are each as viable as the next.) Instead of fussing, those agencies should be spending time and money to produce the kind of PSA that they want. It'll reach just as many as this other PSA and think of how many HIV infections both types of ads will have prevented.
-
I think the only "solution" are all solutions.
Exactly! If no one is offended, then no one is paying attention. The "blowback" from this campaign more than justified it's existence. The job of HIV prevention is not, and should not, be an easy one. Sadly, people think that clicking on their mouse constitutes activism.
The word "active" is right in there. Would be terrific if some of the young people who complain that the Olds have all the say took their turn at the megaphone. And not via online rants, but by actually doing something.
-
Joe, I never said anything about LTS. I admire and value many LTS. Not you of course, but many. My post has nothing to do with LTS though, and its only your desire to call out to the aidsmeds cartel by misquoting me which has even brought up the group. What I said was that we shouldn't petition Larry Kramer ("a septagenarian") to discuss what young gay men need to hear. This isn't rocket science. We wouldn't dream of asking New Yorkers why Californians build their homes in areas prone to wildfires. It goes without saying that 50 year olds have little to contribute regarding the issue of why 22 year olds can't graduate college in four years. For some reason, in the topsy-turvy world of HIV prevention, we seem to solicit the opinions of everyone but the people we're supposedly trying to educate.
Joe, 99% of what you write is worthless, it really is. Its melodramatic, self-centered and just plain malicious. You manipulate emotions, but you never inspire or teach. Everything is always about you, all the time. I've had you on block for so long that I'd almost forgotten you were alive. I would've ignored your prattle here but experience has taught me that you can't let sleeping dogs lie. You absolutely had to jump a discussion I was having and attack me for things I never said. I didn't want to see you hijack yet another thread and turn it into a discussion of how I've victimized you with things I never said. What is it that causes you to do this? "Compassion"? "Empathy"? "What you're trying to do"? "Boasting about once a day dosing"? WTF are you even talking about? Joe, my points were that lying to uninfected 20 somethings makes them doubt the truths we tell them. My second point was that we shouldn't be asking 70 year olds about what 20 year olds think. These are reasonable concerns to anyone. What possible value is there in anything that you've written, but your attempt to tear me down? Get a life dude.
I'm speechless, you really are a nasty individual aren't you..reported.
-
Joe, I never said anything about LTS. I admire and value many LTS. Not you of course, but many. My post has nothing to do with LTS though, and its only your desire to call out to the aidsmeds cartel by misquoting me which has even brought up the group. What I said was that we shouldn't petition Larry Kramer ("a septagenarian") to discuss what young gay men need to hear. This isn't rocket science. We wouldn't dream of asking New Yorkers why Californians build their homes in areas prone to wildfires. It goes without saying that 50 year olds have little to contribute regarding the issue of why 22 year olds can't graduate college in four years. For some reason, in the topsy-turvy world of HIV prevention, we seem to solicit the opinions of everyone but the people we're supposedly trying to educate.
Joe, 99% of what you write is worthless, it really is. Its melodramatic, self-centered and just plain malicious. You manipulate emotions, but you never inspire or teach. Everything is always about you, all the time. I've had you on block for so long that I'd almost forgotten you were alive. I would've ignored your prattle here but experience has taught me that you can't let sleeping dogs lie. You absolutely had to jump a discussion I was having and attack me for things I never said. I didn't want to see you hijack yet another thread and turn it into a discussion of how I've victimized you with things I never said. What is it that causes you to do this? "Compassion"? "Empathy"? "What you're trying to do"? "Boasting about once a day dosing"? WTF are you even talking about? Joe, my points were that lying to uninfected 20 somethings makes them doubt the truths we tell them. My second point was that we shouldn't be asking 70 year olds about what 20 year olds think. These are reasonable concerns to anyone. What possible value is there in anything that you've written, but your attempt to tear me down? Get a life dude.
WTF, you've just earned yourself another Time Out. It's your second one in a very short period of time. We already knew you don't like Joe from the first time around. And you don't have to like him. But neither you nor anyone else is going to be permitted to launch the kind of attack you've let loose in here.
I'm giving you a 30 day Time Out. During that time you can consider whether your membership is worth enough to you to control your behavior and to act accordingly.
I will also mention that some have responded here in kind which had me considering about handing out other Time Outs. Just because one member goes rogue is not an excuse for others to drop the principle of civilized discourse in here. Don't do it again. Snarky is snarky even if someone else started it.
-
jeez, a few of you have leaped off the deep end... i don't have any problem with the ad, looks catered to young urban gays, some cute guys... looks meant to scare, i wish i had been scared.... kramer didn't say anything all that offensive to me
lts... where would i be without yall? lost in the woods with no trail, compass, or guide
a couple of you... need a serious reality check
kill/joe... much respect sir, this isn't the first time i've noticed your postings
-
If YOU get Ignored, you will be having this conversation more or less alone :)
That is so true and so the real challenge as others have said is finding whatever mechanism might get the target audience not only to listen to but also identify with the actual message being delivered ---
While many of them might understand the 'risks' on an intellectual level the fact such a large percentage are in denial with respect to their sexual activity presents a challenge in getting them to believe that they personally have anything to worry about.
Exactly! If no one is offended, then no one is paying attention. The "blowback" from this campaign more than justified it's existence.
I think this thread provides ample evidence for the fact someone is paying attention. And while Larry Kramer may have been guilty of hyperbole to his credit he does have the ability not only to gain people's attention and force them to pay attention. I do wish at points the discussion was a little more objective and less personalized although given the experiences we have all had it is understandable.
I think the only "solution" are all solutions. "Nice" ads, in-your-face ads, speakers, education programs, etc, etc. Every one of those methods will reach a few and each "few" adds up. and yes, sadly, until there's a vaccine or cure or a mass cultural change, nothing we can say or show will totally reach everyone. but that's nothing new either. every advertising agency in the world understands that. why do you think ads are rotated around all the time? Why are they "assuring" at times, and "radical" at others? Because all those ways bring in a few customers at a time - and that's all they can really hope for.
The same challenges which apply to treatment apply to prevention -- unfortunately there is no magic bullet And it is only by providing a mechanism for allowing everyone to actively participate -- whether through civil discussion or with a bull horn in hand -- we will continue to make progress toward discovering and identifying solutions which work.
-
WTF, you've just earned yourself another Time Out. It's your second one in a very short period of time. We already knew you don't like Joe from the first time around. And you don't have to like him. But neither you nor anyone else is going to be permitted to launch the kind of attack you've let loose in here.
I'm giving you a 30 day Time Out. During that time you can consider whether your membership is worth enough to you to control your behavior and to act accordingly.
I will also mention that some have responded here in kind which had me considering about handing out other Time Outs. Just because one member goes rogue is not an excuse for others to drop the principle of civilized discourse in here. Don't do it again. Snarky is snarky even if someone else started it.
Andy, I can't help that this is inherently unfair and that one member has been singled out. I don't agree with personal attacks being thrown around, but it feels as though some members like nothing more than a barney and should sometimes have the intellect to step away from a thread.
-
First, I'd establish whether the ad's target audience really thinks HIV is an easy to manage disease. I suspect most kids these days don't, although let me volunteer that at 29 I'm pretty far removed from their mindset. Operating off the radical belief that they haven't missed 30 years of fear-based sex ed, horror stories about "super aids", that they're not blind to the physical side effects of HIV medications, I'd begin asking questions. "Why do you think you can trust the self-proclaimed serostatus of a stranger you meet on a website called barebackrealtime?" "What was it that lead you to believe you'd use a condom correctly, every time, when drunk?" If you didn't feel safe, why didn't you navigate your behavior towards safer activities?" "Did you wonder how you were going to pay for it?" What do you mean you haven't had sex?*" "Why did you think that a man you'd been with for three weeks was trustworthy enough to ditch condoms with?" "What do you mean you didn't know you could get HIV from a single unprotected encounter?"
I'd educate, as necessary, from there. The variety of answers might not fit comfortably into a 2 minute soundbite on television, but I think it'd be more effective than restating the obvious and expecting a different result.
WOW--did someone just figure out the knowledge--by itself-- does NOT equal behavior change? That information must be considered, considered relevant and integrated into behavior before it can be a catalyst for change?
All I know is that I made objective comments about these ads in the media and within AIDS advocacy groups and I caught holy hell for not being enraged by this 'homophobic and fear mongering' campaign. ehhhh whatever.
-
I guess its a matter of taste how well you receive these ad campains and no doubt some of the criticism this ad garnerd are political . I personally find the ad truthful and realistically demonstrates my experience with HIV . HIV has had a domino effect on my life and to a lesser extent my family's life has been effected also .
-
As Jonathan said, there appears to be a disconnect, between intellectually processing an HIV PSA and getting it to register in the right places. I have done numerous HIV drug/PSA focus groups and the question that always baffles the panel is: "What did you need to hear, for you to understand that you could be at risk of contracting HIV?" Everyone has an answer for what they needed to hear AFTER they tested poz, but they could not identify a main theme or message type that would have worked prior to infection. I find HIV prevention work to be the most challenging, because you are attempting to connect with a wide age audience, which knows little about HIV and solicit their suggestions, on how to reach them, when they do not even realize the real danger that HIV represents.
I think it is also important to understand the climate in which most prevention messages have been presented. With HIV being the "gay plague" and gays being consistently vilified, HIV often becomes just another "mark of the beast", something to be shunned and only talked about in private. So in a climate, where your being gay marks you as an abomination, the very people who vilify you are trying to protect you from a "gay disease". HIV has remained so intertwined with gay that it is almost impossible to separate the two and that is a real issue, that we seem unable to address.
I believe that for prevention messages to become truly effective, we must move HIV into the disease column and leave it there, as it has nothing to do with being gay. But given the history of HIV prevention messages and the stigma of both the disease and gays, I find it very easy to understand how many young gay males must feel, that HIV is inevitable, simply because I'm gay and the two just go together.
-
But given the history of HIV prevention messages and the stigma of both the disease and gays, I find it very easy to understand how many young gay males must feel, that HIV is inevitable, simply because I'm gay and the two just go together.
Do young gay men really feel that way? I didn't feel that way growing up in the 80's when things were a lot more mysterious and hopeless. I still can't wrap my brain around the concept that urban gay men think HIV is no big deal. I have never met anyone for whom HIV wasn't a big deal. Is there anyone on this forum who felt that way?
I freely admit that I don't know much about young, urban gay men. I do know that part of adolescent thinking, which people in their 20s sometimes still have, is a feeling of invulnerability. Most young people don't really believe that something bad like HIV or an auto accident is going to happen to them unless they have already experienced a traumatic event. Also it is not like societies haven't been trying to stop people from even having sex outside of marriage for thousands of years. Getting young people to be sexually responsible is difficult even without HIV.
-
Personally, I believe the general public needs both messages. Scare tactics about the seriousness of HIV, and information about how "manageable" it can be. Both. And they are a bit contradictory.
Members of the public who can't deal with seemingly contradictory messages - well touch shit. Since both messages are true, at least the confused person will have thought a moment or two about one message!
Better than nothing.
-
And maybe some of you here could stop worrying if your own personal story is validated or invalidated by news or education campaigns. As long as its mostly true, true for enough people, isn't that good enough? You know, specialists - and we HIV+ people in this forum are a bit overly interested parties - easily find fault with generalists. You can't expect fine details all the time in the general idea, mass market media. Some kinds of media are about broad strokes.
-
The add doesn't impress me, nor does it unimpress me.
IMHO, the more we get the word out, whether it be shock based or not the better the chances of getting some results.
However, yes, Knowledge does not equal change in behavior. We are dealing with Human Behavior which inspite of our highly evolved brains cannot be trained as easily as say a pet bird, dog, etc.. humans know that smoking can cause Cancer and kill you, yet we still smoke. We know that drinking and driving can kill you, yet we still kill ourselves everyday on our highways bombed out of our minds. And yes, humans still have unsafe sex inspite of the consequences that we know can happen.
The pleasure center of the human mind is a monumental force to overcome and can supercede any rational thinking. Just ask an addict. I'm not saying everyone who is HIV+ is a sex addict..I'm merely pointing out that sex is a huge pleasure and at times can shut out the rational part of our brains..ie, "I dont have a condom but he is so hot and Im so horny and I'm sure once will be OK inspite of that picure I saw of anal cancer".
I'm not sure there is a silver bullet, but as someone else said we need to use all the weapons in our arsenal whatever htey may be.
To touch on the subject of "one pill a day". Well in a matter of a week I went from "one pill a day bliss" to 5 pills a day (all HIV meds), not counting the Vitamin D and Multi vitamins I now have to take. Oh and the wonderfuly painful process of injecting a 1.5" needle of Testosterone in my leg (not saying HIv causes Low T, jsut saying in my case it it at least partly indicated because of HIV). Last but definitly not least my subpar Kidneys that have emerged since taking Truvada. Which now I am burdeneded with the anxiety of having to potentially switch meds again. But guess what, I could have avoided most if not all of this stuff If I had just used a condom. I knew better, and I'm not sure the NYC ad or any ad for that matter might have changed things. Maybe, yes, but I cannot unequivocaly say it would have stopped that one encounter.
W
-
Seriously? I honestly think we're never going to really get anywhere with prevention messages until we get rid of the shame that surrounds sexual intercourse.
I don't get that shame at all. It's something nearly everyone in the world does and without it we wouldn't even be here. Until people start being more sex-positive, we're going to keep on getting more and more people who are hiv-positive. I believe shame is the number one driver of on-going hiv infection.
Prevention messages never seem to talk about how to correctly use condoms. They never seem to talk about how to negotiate for condom use - and this is a very difficult thing for many.
I could go on and on and hopefully I'll be able to come back to this thread later tonight or tomorrow morning, but I've got to be elsewhere shortly.
-
They never seem to talk about how to negotiate for condom use - and this is a very difficult thing for many.
That is very true.
-
Seriously? I honestly think we're never going to really get anywhere with prevention messages until we get rid of the shame that surrounds sexual intercourse.
I don't get that shame at all. It's something nearly everyone in the world does and without it we wouldn't even be here. Until people start being more sex-positive, we're going to keep on getting more and more people who are hiv-positive. I believe shame is the number one driver of on-going hiv infection.
Prevention messages never seem to talk about how to correctly use condoms. They never seem to talk about how to negotiate for condom use - and this is a very difficult thing for many.
I could go on and on and hopefully I'll be able to come back to this thread later tonight or tomorrow morning, but I've got to be elsewhere shortly.
Amen. I would add the extra shame around gay intercourse! Maybe if we approached prevention from a sex-positive point of view, people would listen. How about a poster that says "no matter how hot you are, if you are HIV + a lot of people won't want to sleep with you"? Or maybe put positive in your online profile on Manhunt and see how quickly the responses come?.
-
From this CDC report,
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/resources/factsheets/incidence.htm
If one looks at the report and specifically the first graph you can see the huge drop in the number of infections per year from the early 80's to early 90's. I am sure the decline can be attributed to gaining more knowledge about HIV and the success of early prevention programs. Since the early 90's new infections have been been fairly constant with the exception of a couple year spike before lowering somewhat. CDC projected new infections to remain constant the following 3 yrs, 2009. With that fact in mind and please understand I am not advocating reducing prevention programs, 1 person being infected is 1 too many, I do wonder if there is a segment of the population whose behavior and thinking will never change no matter what is tried. Prevention is not a lost cause my any means. We must be diligent and use a variety of approaches, this ad being one, in making sure the rate of new infections do not increase and hope an impact is made upon those most difficult to reach.
-
Seriously? I honestly think we're never going to really get anywhere with prevention messages until we get rid of the shame that surrounds sexual intercourse.
I don't get that shame at all. It's something nearly everyone in the world does and without it we wouldn't even be here. Until people start being more sex-positive, we're going to keep on getting more and more people who are hiv-positive. I believe shame is the number one driver of on-going hiv infection.
Prevention messages never seem to talk about how to correctly use condoms. They never seem to talk about how to negotiate for condom use - and this is a very difficult thing for many.
I could go on and on and hopefully I'll be able to come back to this thread later tonight or tomorrow morning, but I've got to be elsewhere shortly.
Another excellent point regarding the shame of sex, but this is America we are talking about. A country that fines CBS for showing a nanosecond of Janet Jackson's boob, while offering ring side tickets for $5k to watch two men beat each other to a pulp. Violence is great, but sex??? NO! So much of the culture centers on aggression, rather than interpersonal experiences and that extends to the views regarding sex and sexuality. I believe it was just recently that you could show an actual woman, wearing a bra in a commercial. We have restaurants called "Hooters", but you can't show a woman wearing a bra on TV? Huh?
Nor can you ignore the influence of religion/society, which often preaches that sex is merely a way to have children and should only be done with that intention in mind. Ignoring human sexuality, our prevention messages consist of a abstinence only option, that has little bearing in reality. Sex has been removed from people, as if is was an accessory and not factory installed and once removed, it is very hard to reintegrate the whole concept of sex is natural and there are ways to enjoy it safely.
-
Amen. I would add the extra shame around gay intercourse! Maybe if we approached prevention from a sex-positive point of view, people would listen. How about a poster that says "no matter how hot you are, if you are HIV + a lot of people won't want to sleep with you"? Or maybe put positive in your online profile on Manhunt and see how quickly the responses come?.
I totally agree. When I watched the advert for the first time and it said "it's not just HIV", I wasn't immediately thinking of medical complications or the number of pills - I thought the advert would center on stigmatization, discrimination and criminalization. The prospect of invisible fences and sudden loss of attractivity would serve just as good as a prevention message, possibly even more for a 20 y/o.
-
How about a poster that says "no matter how hot you are, if you are HIV + a lot of people won't want to sleep with you"? Or maybe put positive in your online profile on Manhunt and see how quickly the responses come?.
The prospect of invisible fences and sudden loss of attractivity would serve just as good as a prevention message, possibly even more for a 20 y/o.
I think that would be a great deterrent.
-
with all the good intentions and the clever advertising techniques available to the professional media, there is still one unbending truth that is worth repeating overwhelmingly people see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear....inherently reject all else around them.... that may be socially based, religously based or have not particular basis at all..... may even be hard wired into the psyche ..... the message about HIV or just about any other topic has be be something that clears the hurdles of "seeing and hearing what you want ...." I am sure it varies from group to group, age to age and even from person to person....
so in my mind all of these messages will resonate with someone... as already pointed out the drop in infection rates says some body got the message now the challenge seems to be how to reach those that didnt get it....
I am certainly not an expert on what 20 somethings want to see and hear I usually change the channel when that stuff comes on but there seems to be a marketing group that is very successful in "selling " to that particular group ... as well as other demographics.....
so I would certainly see a need to get the "powers" in charge of the various "prevention" programs to recognize that mass marketing is an art form with very wide and diverse approaches depending on the audience.... of course that means that the funding for such ventures must be there....
is there anyone actually in charge with authority/ funding to do that type of program??? does your representative consider such programs a priority for action/ funding ??
ask them or better yet tell them what you expect.....
Nick
-
As a definitely aging gay intellectual (though two years short of a septuagenarian!) and someone who was there at the beginning, I believe it's about time the truth is told in this ad. HIV-positives today may have been saved from the deadly opportunistic infections of the early years of the epidemic by HAART, but they are now beginning to see the ramifications of long-time (and, in some cases, relatively brief) HIV infection and/or antiretroviral use. There has been much recent (but only recent) observation and interest in the hastening and acceleration of the aging process among HIV-positives: brain fog, neurocognitive difficulties, cardiovascular problems, bone problems, co-morbidities and cancers (lung, liver, anal, lymphoma, etc.). It is possible that 30-, 40-, 50-, and 60-year-old bodies are succumbing to the medical depredations of 80-year-olds.
Sure it's true that osteoporosis is a disease of the elderly, but what is it when it keeps occuring in relatively young HIV-positives? Full-blown dementia may no longer be as prominent as it was, but what is it when so many HIV-positives are beginning to complain of "brain fog"? Yes, anal cancer is caused by HPV, but why are there now 174 annual cases per 100,000 among HIV-positive gay men, but 40 cases per 100,000 among HIV-negative gay men, and 2 per 100,000 in the general population? It used to take many years for anal cancer to develop from HPV-related lesions; now the many years have become few.
It is disgraceful that GMHC and GLAAD are condemning this video campaign. I remember in 1982, when I was trying to edit for GMHC what would have been the first publication about GRID (Gay-Related Imuno-Deficiency, as it was then known), and the board of GMHC (EXCEPT for the estimable Larry Kramer), opposed to promoting safer-sex campaigns, said that "we can't tell people how to have sex." They have truly learned nothing.
-
I think the ad is awesome.
But now I'm scared of anal cancer. Damn
-
We can and should tell young people that HIV is very bad and they don't want to get it, but we can do that without condemning or stigmatizing people who already have HIV. And we can and should tell people with HIV that a diagnosis is not the end of their lives, that they still pursue their dreams and seek everything anyone else can extract from life without sending a message to young people that HIV is no big deal.
We need to convey both of these messages, at the same time, and not let one negate or diminish the other.
-
We can and should tell young people that HIV is very bad and they don't want to get it, but we can do that without condemning or stigmatizing people who already have HIV. And we can and should tell people with HIV that a diagnosis is not the end of their lives, that they still pursue their dreams and seek everything anyone else can extract from life without sending a message to young people that HIV is no big deal.
We need to convey both of these messages, at the same time, and not let one negate or diminish the other.
Thank you !
-
How about a poster that says "no matter how hot you are, if you are HIV + a lot of people won't want to sleep with you"?
Sorry, but IMHO this would be completely counter-productive. It's precisely the reason many people don't get tested and the main reason people lie about their status or don't reveal their status when in unsafe sexual situations. :-\
-
I'm totally hot and there ARE quite a few men who want to sleep with me who know my hiv status. The men I speak of are hiv negative (or at least they think they are - so many NEVER TEST). Socially, hiv is mainly what YOU make of it. If you are obsessed with your infection and paranoid about your infection, so will be the people you attract. It's just how it is. I know this through first-hand experience.
-
I'm totally hot and there ARE quite a few men who want to sleep with me who know my hiv status. The men I speak of are hiv negative (or at least they think they are - so many NEVER TEST). Socially, hiv is mainly what YOU make of it. If you are obsessed with your infection and paranoid about your infection, so will be the people you attract. It's just how it is. I know this through first-hand experience.
I waited until I was very POZ to go through my promiscuous stage. Well, my FIRST one at any rate. The decade is young, still.
But for the Klub Kidz, the D/D free crowd, it can seriously mess up a tweak-ed out guy's Saturday Night on Manhunt.
What HIV does seem to require is that people grow up a little earlier than they wanted to, no matter how old they are when they test positive.
Granted, it does not always happen. There's an App for that (GrindR), a bottle, pills, whatever. But after a few years of being positive, most folks with HIV sort of sidle up to the grownups' table.
As for what this can bring to the HIV prevention battle, I have no idea.