Welcome! Sign in to access your account. New user?
ADULT: OFF HOME DIRECTORY SEARCH RANDOM POLL MAKE A POLL

HIV/AIDS

What if it were mostly differant people?

Posted by totoro on 2007-12-15 19:43:43

If AIDS primarily affected rich, straight, white, republican men it would have been considered a national health emergency back in the 80's! People amaze me sometimes! This shouldn't even be a question!

Posted by dave3 on 2007-12-27 02:39:53

That's just nuts.I think the reason AIDS didn't get proper coverage at the time(early eighties),was a combination of two things...mass-denial by most everyone,to a new,scary disease...and a societal prejudice against acknowledging that bad things might happen to oppressed groups,that don't involve The Man. My memory,is that once Rock Hudson stepped up,the AIDS phenomenon got extensive coverage everywhere...you heard about it much more than today,and in more alarmist terms(we knew less).Oprah was just getting started,and you were hearing about AIDS in the schools as well.

Posted by totoro on 2008-01-02 18:54:41

When Rock Hudson "stepped up" we were already many years into the epidemic. The Reagan administration had practically ignored it when it was considered a "gay disease". There have been much smaller "new diseases" that recieved large amounts of federal funding much sooner, because, yes, they didn't primarily affect those who many people felt "deserved it". I stand by my origional argument.