Quantcast

Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
E-newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr MySpace
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 21, 2014, 06:21:52 PM

Login with username, password and session length


Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 635521
  • Total Topics: 48211
  • Online Today: 271
  • Online Ever: 585
  • (January 07, 2014, 02:31:47 PM)
Users Online

Welcome


Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and others concerned about HIV/AIDS.  Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning:  Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

  • The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own physician.

  • All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

  • Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

  • We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are true and correct to their knowledge.

  • Product advertisement—including links; banners; editorial content; and clinical trial, study or survey participation—is strictly prohibited by forums members unless permission has been secured from POZ.

To change forums navigation language settings, click here (members only), Register now

Para cambiar sus preferencias de los foros en español, haz clic aquí (sólo miembros), Regístrate ahora

Finished Reading This? You can collapse this or any other box on this page by clicking the symbol in each box.

Author Topic: Offensive NY Times article? (Sun 22 Apr)  (Read 1428 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CalvinC

  • Member
  • Posts: 143
Offensive NY Times article? (Sun 22 Apr)
« on: April 25, 2012, 09:12:00 AM »
Hi all.

I'm not sure if I'm being overly sensitive but....

In the Sunday NY Times, 22 Apr, in the Sunday Styles section, there is a 'Modern Love' essay entitled "Devoted but Dateless." In it, the writer speaks of her devotion to her autistic son and how the fact of him often results in men not interested in pursuing romance/dating/relationship with her. (Sound familiar?)

At one point, she writes: "But as my friend said, having a child with autism can be, in the eyes of some men, the dating equivalent of being an H.I.V.-positive crack addict with 30 cats."

I cannot imagine this to be anything but a stab at humour, no matter how many times I go over it. For me, the litmus test is to "turn it around": instead of "HIV" insert what ails her son, autism. How would that sound to you? "...the dating equivalent of being an autistic crack addict with 30 cats."  Funny eh?

I'm interested in responding to the Times (and to the writer) but I wanted to get some feedback before I do anything.

What do you think?

The article is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/22/fashion/devoted-but-dateless.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all#

Andrew

Offline Hellraiser

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,136
  • Semi-misanthropic
Re: Offensive NY Times article? (Sun 22 Apr)
« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2012, 10:01:39 AM »
She was merely stringing together unattractive qualities in a dating partner.  For her being HIV positive may be a deal breaker.  While it's not thrilling for us to hear, it's nothing new to these forums.

Offline wolfter

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,460
Re: Offensive NY Times article? (Sun 22 Apr)
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2012, 10:49:16 AM »
I think most of us have deal breakers.  Having 30 cats would definitely be one for me.

Wolfie
Complacency is the enemy.  ;)  Challenge yourself daily for maximum  return on investment.

Offline GSOgymrat

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,009
  • HIV+ since 1993. INTJ
Re: Offensive NY Times article? (Sun 22 Apr)
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2012, 03:29:49 PM »
I think most of us have deal breakers.  Having 30 cats would definitely be one for me.

Wolfie

My 30 cats and I agree that we don't need you or your little dog.

Offline Joe K

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 3,605
  • 31 Years Poz
Re: Offensive NY Times article? (Sun 22 Apr)
« Reply #4 on: April 25, 2012, 03:43:49 PM »
I think you are angry at the wrong person.  It's a case of not shooting the messenger.  The author simply repeated something that has been said for over 30 years.  The troubling "real" issue here is that being poz is still seen as something to fear and it's still quit acceptable to publicly degrade us, whether in media or through the legal system.  We have become so demonized in some parts of society, that most people won't see anything that offensive in what the author wrote.

The fact that many people will agree with what the author wrote, is what you should really be angry about.

Joe
« Last Edit: April 25, 2012, 04:11:11 PM by killfoile »

Offline LiveWithIt

  • Member
  • Posts: 378
Re: Offensive NY Times article? (Sun 22 Apr)
« Reply #5 on: April 25, 2012, 11:19:37 PM »


What do you think?

The article is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/22/fashion/devoted-but-dateless.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all#

Andrew

She thinks HIV is funny, but I doubt she would laugh at an autism joke, therefore making her a hypocrite. 
Pray God you can cope
I know you have a little life in you yet.
I know you have a lot of strength left.

Offline wolfter

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,460
Re: Offensive NY Times article? (Sun 22 Apr)
« Reply #6 on: April 26, 2012, 01:17:18 AM »
My 30 cats and I agree that we don't need you or your little dog.

Read this before going to work.  I wasn't sure of the intent.  Hoping it was just a flippant remark that I once again don't understand.   

Wolfie, who totally loves his little doggie.
Complacency is the enemy.  ;)  Challenge yourself daily for maximum  return on investment.

Offline GSOgymrat

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,009
  • HIV+ since 1993. INTJ
Re: Offensive NY Times article? (Sun 22 Apr)
« Reply #7 on: April 26, 2012, 10:01:04 AM »
Quote from: wolfter link=topic=43053.msg532672#msg532672 dIte=1335417438
Read this before going to work.  I wasn't sure of the intent.  Hoping it was just a flippant remark that I once again don't understand.   

Wolfie, who totally loves his little doggie.

I assure you I don't have 30 cats, they don't speak to me and I love your little dog.

Offline mecch

  • Member
  • Posts: 11,435
  • red pill? or blue pill?
Re: Offensive NY Times article? (Sun 22 Apr)
« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2012, 10:20:41 AM »
Its most likely a careless ignorant remark.  After all, a crack addict is no prize, in the partner sweepstakes. Add to that HIV and the person would have a lot of challenges.  But your analysis sits right with me.

On the flip side, I thought episode 2 of HBO's Girls had a reasonably balanced HIV miniplot.  The heroine is supposed to be obsessed with fear of becoming HIV+ since girlhood.  Her friend makes a kind of ignorant crack confusing HIV and AIDS and the heroine explains quite clearly the difference.  The whole episode is pretty good dramatizing dealing with safesex and STDs. 

At least the writer in your NYT article said HIV positive and didnt resort to the common confusion AIDS = HIV = AIDS.

Baby steps?
“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

 


Terms of Membership for these forums
 

© 2014 Smart + Strong. All Rights Reserved.   terms of use and your privacy
Smart + Strong® is a registered trademark of CDM Publishing, LLC.