> Jerry suggests that there may have been an identification of open
> gayness with the status of Havana as a U.S. brothel; and, only in that
> sense, was the opposition to gayness politically motivated: to oppose
> gayness was to oppose that influence.
>
> Well, that was certainly stupid (and would seem to mitigate against
> Yoshie's
> claim that Castro was brilliant).
I don't think it's stupid. People don't have time to write dissertations during revolutionary times. He was getting rid of the sex industry that served the colonialist tourists. Male prostitution was part of that industry.
>
> But Jerry cannot possibly know about my (or anybody else's)
> sensitivity in
> this area. Such a leap is just as dumb as Castro's when he equated
> queerness
> with capitalism (though there is a certain idiot logic symmetry
> between the
> two positions).
I've been on this list for about five years and I have never noticed you getting that upset about anything else.
>> It is true that they were quarantined, but this quarantine makes
>> perfect sense
>
> in that it protected others from certain death.
>
> So AIDS patients should be quarantined to protect other people?
At a time when there is no idea how the disease is communicated and the disease is fatal, yes.
>
> Of course not. But teaching people to practice safe sex is a lot less
> oppressive than quarantining them.
But teaching people to practice safe sex does not necessarily mean they will. Take Foucault for example; apparently he made a point to have unprotected sex when he had AIDS, thinking that spreading the disease would be a means of radicalizing people. Also, some people don't care. Also, some people don't like sex with condoms. It's not a black/white issue.
Joanna