> >You seem to be claiming that the information
>>from creating classes of equivalence constituted by risk factors provides us
>>with information useful for action.
>
>Indeed there is information useful for action. Namely it is unnecessary
>to promote undue alarm and fear amongst straight people who are unlikely
>to get Aids.
_Undue_ alarm & fear are to be avoided, yes, but it doesn't make sense at all to avoid _due precautions_ against STDs, including AIDS. Whatever your sexual preference when it comes to object choice, it is advisable to use condoms & other protective gear when you engage in activities in which exchange of bodily fluids is involved. Condom use protects you from not only AIDS but also other STDs.
In addition, condoms protect women from unwanted pregnancy. While many women use the Pill & other contraceptives, it is still a good idea to use condoms in addition to them, in that any one contraceptive may fail (due to product defects, human errors, etc.). Therefore, condom use among heterosexuals should be an important topic of sex education, especially given the fact that since the invention of the Pill, straight boys have gotten lazy & developed the habit of entrusting girls to "take care of it." The encouragement of condom use can lead men to take responsibility for their sexuality.
Besides, the promotion of safer sex does not have to be prudish at all. Safer sex education can be conducted with emphasis on enjoyment & mutual respect. Pornography, if created with a view toward such emphasis, can be very useful & educational.
Risks should be discussed in relation to specific acts, not in relation to categories of individuals (e.g., homosexuals, IV drug users, & Africans). Acts & identities are not the same, which you should already know, having read Michel Foucault, etc. (e.g., sodomy named acts; homosexuality refers to a category of individuals).
Yoshie