>From: James Heartfield <Jim at heartfield.demon.co.uk>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>Subject: Re: Aids
>Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 09:36:37 +0000
>
>In message <F132oBJHsxPCFj2AhGw00000eea at hotmail.com>, jan carowan
><jancarowan at hotmail.com> writes
>
> >In the case of Aids contraction, you seem to me to be ignoring or
> >downplaying the hidden variables while resting with very imperfect
> >statistical knowledge: if you are gay or a drug user or African the
>chance
> >of the random event of Aids is significantly higher than it is for "most
> >people." Such "knowledge" is not causally relevant, but it does lead to
> >invidious categorization.
>
>I'm sorry but it is plainly relevant in health promotional campaigns.
>Not only is it wasteful to direct health campaigns where they are not
>needed, it is cruel to frighten people who are not at risk, and it
>promotes anti-gay prejudice.
Mr Heartfield,
Being gay does not put one at higher risk of Aids contraction; unprotected anal sex does. Those who practice it are at risk, regardless of so called sexual orientation. I believe that the American rebel Howard Stern is rather obsessed with heterosexual anal sex. Social prejudice has prevented an open discussion of the hidden variables in HIV transmission. Is this not rather obvious?
And what are the consequences of cavalierly noting that African is a high risk category?
>
> >You seem to me to be defining straight woman as one who precisely does
>not
> >also fall into a high risk category. This seems to me to be essentialist,
> >invidious categorization.
>
>I just don't understand this pedantic bandying about of words. There is
>some responsibility on your part to make yourself understood. In what
>language is 'essentialist' a common expression? In what philosophy is
>the distinction between essence and appearance invidious?
Well, there is no causal essence to gayness or African, no inherent, hidden property that makes the random event of Aids more likely for "them" than it is for "most people". Of course for many, if not most Americans, gays, drug users and Africans do share the inherent, hidden property of sinfulness which God has punished in the forms of HIV contraction. I think such a vision was openly expressed by the Reagan-Bush team in the 80s; it is rather depressing that it will have the pulpit again. But this is evidently the sacrifice the radicals on LBO thought necessary to hasten the onset of revolution.
Warm regards, Jan
_____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com