prevent hiv

2

AIDS deaths are almost half of what they were in 2005 — but experts worry Trump could reverse that

  • A new report from the United Nations shows promising progress in treating the global HIV/AIDS crisis, but some experts worry President Donald Trump’s policy proposals might turn the trend right back around.
  • The report, released Thursday, found that approximately 53% of the 36.7 million people living with HIV globally in 2016 had access to life-saving treatments. This is up substantially from 2005, when only 7% of those living with HIV received antiretroviral therapy, according to WHO.
  • In addition, the report said the number of AIDS-related deaths dropped from 1.9 million in 2005 to 1 million in 2016 — reducing the death toll by nearly half in the span of 11 years.
  • While these numbers demonstrate significant progress in the effort to combat HIV/AIDS, Mitchell Warren, executive director of HIV-prevention advocacy group AVAC, told Mic he worries that Trump’s proposed budget cuts could put the epidemic back in peril. Read more (7/20/17)

on this date in 1981, the new york times printed an article with the headline “rare cancer seen in 41 homosexuals.” this headline is historic because it is the first mention of what would become the hiv epidemic. at this time, on this date in 1981, the epidemic didn’t have a name. 

even after 36, it is still chilling to read this headline because it is a sobering reminder of all that the world didn’t know about hiv. what caused it? how to treat it? we didn’t know shit! it took three years to identify HIV. three years to find out that it wasn’t cancer. however, in those three years, stigma, blame, and shame didn’t need a name to thrive. many died not even knowing the name of the disease that robbed them of breath and humanity. 

this headline is historic because it is the first mention of what would become the hiv epidemic. 

36 years later we know so much. we have survived so much. we now have life-saving meds. we now even have PrEP - the pill that helps to prevent hiv infection. this is huge because, in 1981, treatment for any virus was rare, yet alone a virus that was virtually unknown. 

we still have work to do. we still have to shift culture and we still have to fight health care and access. we still have to fight to live. but we know so much more now than we did on july 3, 1981.

6

I’m excited to share the first episode of Tested, a comic I’ve been working on in collaboration with the New York State Department of Health, AIDS Institute and writer Josh Billig. The comic is being made as part of the AIDS Institute’s app called @ygetit, which is designed primarily for young people living with HIV and helping them live healthier lives.

youtube

There is a connection between HIV treatment and HIV prevention. See how they add up to “Treat 2 Prevent.” And how it can help stop the spread of HIV.

Watch the video, talk to your healthcare provider, and find out more at HelpStopTheVirus.com

2

Let’s stop HIV in New York City

  • If you are HIV-negative, PEP and PrEP can help you stay that way.
  • If you are HIV-positive, PEP and PrEP can help protect your partners.

 

Daily PrEP

PrEP is a daily pill that can help keep you HIV-negative as long as you take it every day.

 

Emergency PEP

If you are HIV-negative and think you were exposed to HIV, immediately go to a clinic or emergency room and ask for PEP (Post-exposure  Prophylaxis).

  • PEP can stop HIV if started within 36 hours of exposure.
  • You continue taking PEP for 28 days.

Many insurance plans including Medicaid cover PEP and PrEP. Assistance may be available if you are uninsured. Visit NYC Health’s website to find out where to get PrEP or PEP in New York City.

anonymous asked:

Hey cliff! What do you think about kink/sexual elements in the pride parade? Are ppl against it trying to desexualize the queer community to make it more mainstream-palatable? Are they trying to make it more welcoming to young/unsure people who might be scared off? My gut says it's historically been a part of this community, but otoh, I don't want to make people uncomfortable with my sexuality, and on the third hand, gay people existing makes people uncomfortable so fuck it? Idk, basically.

Personally, I’m in favor of the sexual elements, because I am a horny bastard and I like to see oiled young men prancing down the middle of Main Street in leather harnesses.  Ummmf.  Sorry, it can’t all be Discourse.

…Okay, back on track.  I do feel sort of mixed about this, because maybe it is unwelcoming to young/unsure people–although on the other hand, sometimes it’s very welcoming to them.  Sometimes it’s safer to approach queerness from a less sexualized perspective, but sometimes it’s good to see affirmation that this celebration of your sexuality is a celebration of your sexuality, not of dry labels that should never be connected to anything so gauche as actually wanting to fuck people.

I think that’s the intended message to the mainstream, too–that our sexuality is sexual and you aren’t tolerating us unless you tolerate that.  Accepting queer people as “people who say they’re queer but never do anything upsetting like act queer” is not good enough.  Pride parades are meant to be in-your-face, are meant to be angry-sexual, are meant to say “you don’t like when we kiss in public?  then you’re really not going to like this.”  If they’re not causing discomfort, then they’re just St. Patrick’s Day for gays.

Of course I don’t think the whole parade should be sexualized–there’s a place in it for families, for asexual people, for unsexy community services like HIV prevention and rape crisis centers, and so forth–but the presence of sexual elements serves a real purpose and should be defended.

“We’re here, we’re queer, deal with it” doesn’t mean much if it’s just “we’re here, we’re queer but that’s just a word we use which has no particular consequences that you have to think about, I guess that’s pretty easy to deal with.”

anonymous asked:

(rape tw) Can you explain why you don't think HIV+ people have a moral responsibility to tell potential partners their status, if that is indeed your position? I understand that if they have an undetectable viral load and they practice safer sex, the risk of transmission is very low, but it still exists, no? I'm just trying to understand. I have HPV and I feel guilty for not telling the man who raped me beforehand, and that's not even a potentially fatal illness, just an inconvenience. (1/2)

(2/2) I want to support HIV+ people and not make their lives harder, but I’m having a really hard time with this perspective from an ethical standpoint.

(anon sorry, i answered this but forgot it in my drafts)

anon, i’m not really sure where this is coming from since i haven’t posted about this in a while [since this came in before my other post got resurrected] but i’ll try to explain (and forgive me, this got so damn long but i’m quite swamped lately and have no time to edit)

i don’t think i’ve said that there’s no responsibility to disclose, and i wonder what made you think i did, but the main point i want to get across is that it doesn’t really matter what i think about the morality of nondisclosure in any given situation — what matters is whether i think it should be a serious crime. this is a separate question because the law isn’t about morality, in this case it should be about public health.

and these laws are a resounding failure from a public health perspective, especially since as written they penalize testing and usually completely fail to take into account the risk level of the activity (including condom use) or even whether transmission actually occurred (even when the charge is “criminal transmission”!). these laws were born out of stigma, not science or real ethics. but you don’t have to take my word for it; this is the accepted position among HIV/AIDS and sexual health advocacy organizations, and even the CDC is recommending that they be reviewed. i really recommend reading what these organizations have to say about it. from a quick search UNAIDS’s policy brief (pdf) seems pretty good and clear but there is much more out there.

i’m so sorry about what happened to you and i want to know that you’re not at fault at all. no rape survivor is at fault for their rape or for the consequences of the rape for the rapist. he chose to do that to you, and he accepted the risks that came with that. that is entirely on him!

i think a major problem with the debate about disclosure is that, as the UNAIDS brief says, it “places […] responsibility for HIV prevention exclusively on those already living with HIV and dilutes the public health message of shared responsibility for sexual health between sexual partners.” this applies to other STIs as well. we all have to take responsibility for our own sexual health, at least when it comes to acts we consented to.

even if it may seem to make sense on a moral level, placing the entire responsibility on people who know they’re positive for HIV or any other infection just doesn’t work. there will always be people who don’t know their status or can’t know their status for sure because they were exposed too recently. these people can’t disclose, yet if they are HIV+ they pose a much greater transmission risk than people who know they’re positive because they can’t possibly be accessing treatment, because transmission risk is highest in the acute infection stage when they’ve first contracted HIV, and because they’re less likely to be taking the additional safer sex precautions that they’d take if they knew.

there is still a profound stigma against people living with HIV and other STIs. when we’re influenced by this stigma, we’re likely to focus on finding someone to blame for transmission (or even the possibility of transmission). when we reject the stigma, we can focus on effective methods of prevention which involve helping everyone accurately judge their risk level and make informed choices to protect themselves.

you mention that safer sex with someone with an undetectable viral load is very low-risk (so low-risk, in fact, that i don’t think there’s ever been a documented case of transmission under these circumstances) but that any risk is too much. it’s fine if you feel that way; you set your own boundaries. but sex with someone who doesn’t know their status is much riskier. so is it morally permissible not to disclose to your partners that you don’t know your status? and should not disclosing that be a crime?

i don’t think most people think so, or they haven’t thought about it. to a lot of people, not knowing their status is normal, because their sexual choices are governed by assumptions: they assume that they are negative, for HIV, HSV, etc., and they assume that everyone they have sex with is negative, unless they say otherwise. they assume this partly because of lack of education, and partly because of stigma. we think of people with STIs as dirty, reckless, less than virtuous. we don’t want to think of ourselves or the people we’re intimate with that way. but of course, people with STIs are not those things — having an STI is an entirely morally neutral characteristic of a person. and these assumptions about ourselves and others aren’t sound. they are actually an obstacle to STI prevention.

so these debates trouble me because they obscure the fact that the best practice for everyone is to get tested regularly, disclose what you know about your status (including whether you know it!), and ask about your partner’s status, making it clear that it’s safe for them to be honest. and when we place all responsibility on people who know they’re positive, we validate our assumptions that everyone is negative, but we have to challenge those assumptions if we want to protect ourselves and each other. we have to acknowledge that when we decide to have sex based on the assumption that our partner must be negative, we are taking a risk. even in a world where everyone who knows they’re positive disclosed — and i believe most do — this would be a risk.

the sooner we can accept this and reject stigma, the sooner we can take steps toward more honest and open communication in our sexual lives and make healthy, fully informed choices, the sooner we can stop the spread of HIV.

anonymous asked:

Hi Dicta, I have kind of a strange question for you. What would you say is the line between enjoying reading fic about gay couples, and fetishizing gay couples? I see posts every now and then who comment about people enjoying fic featuring gay couples together, or bemoaning how people just ship all same sex characters (or people in real life), together. As someone who can reads multiple, same sex characters in different fandoms, I worry about crossing the line? I hope this ask makes sense.

that’s a tricky question, anon, and an important one. this is gonna be a little off the cuff but i also don’t want to let this languish so here are a few things that i think make a difference:

Do the characters have interiority? If the characters have thoughts and emotions and motivations that have to do with things other than sex and sterotypically gay stuff, that’s a good sign. If they do things because they have a talent or skill for those things or want to develop one, care about how their friends and families will react, are addressing something in their personal history, etc., those are good signs. If they spend all of their time having sex, arranging sex, talking about sex, and occasionally, like shopping and being snarky with the girls and ~being fabulous~? Not a good sign.

Do the characters have complete lives? Do they have jobs, families, friends, roommates, pets, childhood memories, goals, histories, preferences? Do other parts of their identities - class, race, religion, nationality, etc. - shape their lives? That’s a good sign. If the entire construction of their character is about fucking, and if the things they think about and do are only or predominantly related to sex, that’s a bad sign. Being a one-dimensional gay stereotype is also a bad sign. Even if the fic is about them having sex, that doesn’t mean that’s all they do or all they are, and plenty of PWPs capture that.

How do other characters treat them? Do characters within the story treat them as whole, multi-dimensional people? Good sign. Less good: only interacting with the gay characters in ways that have to do with having or arranging for sex (going clubbing, helping them get dressed to go clubbing, getting or giving sex advice, gossiping about sex), only interacting with characters in ways that are obviously villainous and negate the subtlety and complexity of homophobia or erase casual homophobia, treating gay characters as though they don’t have any sexual desire or sex, only interacting with gay characters in ways that play to stereotypes (if it would be at home on queer eye for the straight guy, that’s not a good thing), treating them as though their sexuality is there for others to observe (which implicitly gives the audience permission to do the same thing).

How does the author treat them? If you get the sense that the author is doing the equivalent of smushing two ken dolls together and making them kiss, take a pass. Authors who write good gay fiction, fan or pro, treat their characters with respect and give them the aforementioned interiority and complexity.

How do you treat them? Are you in it to imagine cute boys kissing, or because these are characters you’re attached to for reasons to do with who they specifically are as specific people and/or who you specifically are as a person? Do you think of them as your ‘smol gay sons’ or similar? Do you have a preference for ships and stories that replicate heteronormative dynamics? Do you think they’re so cute you could just smush their cheeks together and it’s adorable to read about them getting happy endings? Are they your literal or emotional wank fodder? If you were watching fic instead of reading it, would your habits resemble those of straight guys who are into lesbian porn? Are the stories you’re reading about specific questions or characters? Or do you prefer things that would qualify as any two guys?

Why are you reading slash? Like why slash specifically? Why not het, why not femslash, why not profic? What is it that you get out of reading m/m fanfic? Is it that it turns you on? That you get off on it? That you think of gay men as harmless and therefore feel safe reading about their sexuality? That you think gay men are fabulous and fashionable and bitchy and fun and want to vicariously hang out with them because it amuses you? That you think of gay men as hypersexual and so assume they do a lot of things that other people wouldn’t plausibly do? If you answered yes to any of these questions, you might be a fetishizer.

How do you treat LGBTQ people? Not characters, people. Do you know what the laws for lgbtq people are like where you live? What economic, social, institutional, and safety-related challenges they’re likely to run into? Do you know whether the characters you love so much could, if they moved to your town, be evicted, fired, or jailed for being gay? Do you know how they would get treated by your local police department, and who they can and can’t turn to if they feel unsafe? Do you know what kinds of experiences they might have going on dates at restaurants, bars, and other businesses in your community and where they would or wouldn’t feel safe? If you have elected representatives, do you call them when issues affecting lgbtq communities come up? Do you know whether issues affecting lgbtq communities have come up lately? Do you know whether trans people could go to the bathroom where you work or go to school? Do you know whether trans and lgb people’s health needs are covered by your insurance? Do you know what the unemployment and murder rates are for trans people in your area? Do you know which health care providers in your area are lgbtq friendly? Do you know what it means for a health care provider to be lgbtq friendly and why it matters? If an lgbtq teenager got kicked out of their house in your town, what resources would be available to them? How have gay people  in your city, state, district, country, etc., been treated at different points at time? If you’ve read about gay men having sex, do you know what steps gay men take to prevent HIV/AIDS? What do you know about the history of the HIV/AIDS epidemic and how it would have affected your characters? How much do you know about the side effects of ARVs for the treatment of HIV/ADS, or about the resurgence of comorbid STIs in gay communities? If a gay teenager came to you for advice, do you understand enough about the actual anatomy of gay sex to give accurate, helpful advice that doesn’t rest on what you’ve read in the magical fic world where everyone’s prostate is just past their anus (it isn’t) or where anything vaguely damp can be used for lube? What do you do when you see homophobia or transphobia? Are you confident that you could recognize subtle homophobia or transphobia? Do you have relationships with lgbtq people that they would describe as important to them? In thinking about all of these questions, did you always or almost always picture white, middle- and upper-class gay men? How much do you know, and how much do you care, about lgbtq people? Or are you just here for the squee and the orgasms?


For each of these, there are obvious exceptions. It’s definitely not necessarily an issue of fetishization to be turned on by or get off on slash. It’s not a bad thing to want gay characters to have happy endings. It isn’t about one specific fic; many of us read the occasional fluffy PWP and, contrary to what tumblr might have you believe, that one thing you do occasionally doesn’t define you. This also isn’t one-reader-fits-all; it’s a really different thing to be a queer reader who wants to see gay characters get to be happy for once because homophobia is real and constant and horrible and it’s an emotional balm to believe in the possibility of queer happiness than it is to be a straight reader who wants to see gay characters get to be happy because angst is sad and reading about homophobia is sad and you want to and have the privilege to avoid things that make you sad. But I do think it’s a decent round up, maybe with an emphasis on the first two and the last two questions.

And anon? Whether you agree with all of the questions or not, and whether you like all of your answers or not, I’m glad - as a queer person and as a fellow fan - that you’re asking. The question itself is not an answer, but asking it and taking the time to be thoughtful about it is definitely a good sign.

Hey everyone!

I was recently in contact with the person running the Shift Project and it seems like a genuinely great opportunity for aid and support for qualifying individuals. The coordinator told me that they could also offer rides, gift cards, and other benefits for people who decide to be a part of the program. If you’re in the area and meet the criteria, it’s a completely confidential and can help aid others in the future.

“The SHIFT project is seeking participants who:
-are 18-24 years old
-are trans or non-binary people
of color
-live or work in Alameda or San Francisco county

Have engaged in one or more of the following behaviors in the past 6 months:
-had sex with more than 2 partners
-engaged in sex work
-consumed alcohol almost 
every day
-used drugs more than 2 days a week on average

This community-based project aims reduce substance use and risk behaviors for HIV, as well as HIV/STI incidence among transgender and non- binary young adults of color in Alameda and San Francisco counties. We will develop culturally and trans competent MEI (Motivational Enhancement Intervention) curricula and examine the effectiveness of these curricula. The information and outcomes gained through the SHIFT project will help improve services for agencies that provide HIV prevention and substance abuse treatment for transgender and non-binary young adults of color.

The SHIFT project recognizes that trans and non-binary young adults of color are frequently experiencing the intersection of racism and transphobia in addition to other systems of oppression. This is why SHIFT is seeking to work with trans young adults of color to connect them with services and provide health education sessions.”

HIV

I work with people who have HIV as a part of my job. If you have HIV please remember:

HIV can be controlled by medications for a super long time (think 30 years+). It is more like getting a diabetes diagnosis than a death sentence.

No matter how your infection happened you deserve to live and have a happy life.

By federal law in the United States there is tons of resources to help you get medication for FREE.

You can find partners who will accept you and love you.

You can have children who are born HIV-. If a child is born in a first world county with medical care the likelyhood of transmission is rediculously low.

On medication your likelyhood of infecting others decreases significantly depending on your viral load.

PEP and PrEP are exciting things to look into to be able to have unprotected sex and prevent transmission.

HIV does not have to be central to your identity.

People who take their medication like prescribed can actually have as few as 2 doctor appointments a year for their condition !

Don’t let stigma, fear and lack of education get you down! You are a wonderful person and can achieve wonderful things. Don’t give up.

And if you don’t know your status please get tested. Please!

anonymous asked:

I know that having HIV isn't a crime, but isn't having unprotected sex with someone when you know you have it against the law? They always have to be aware of the risks, right?

yes, unfortunately many areas have laws of that nature. the statutes exist to criminalise the existence of people living with hiv. these laws do make hiv a crime, i do not support them on any level.

malicious or purposeful infection of others is rare! the vast majority of people living with hiv invest huge amounts of their available resources into keeping their viral loads low and keeping their potential partners safe. living with hiv sucks! it’s expensive! it’s exhausting! it’s a stigmitised existence! we don’t seek out new “victims”, many of us actively campaign for education & safe sex resources to prevent the spread of hiv. obviously there are careless outliers in any group, but these cases of legitimate aggravated negligence can be easily prosecuted under other, non-hiv specific statutes - as is the case in many districts and states. to give you an idea of how these oppressive hiv-specific laws have been used in the past:

  • an hiv+ man who had an undetectable viral load was sentenced to 25 years after a single sexual encounter during which he used a condom but did not disclose his status [source]
  • an hiv+ man was sentenced to 10 years for aggravated assault after biting a police officer. his saliva was considered to be the dangerous instrument for the purpose of the “aggravated” portion of the charge - it’s worth noting that saliva cannot transmit hiv [source]

other laws or bills:

  • in oklahoma proposed senate bill 733 would require couples pass blood tests proving they did not have communicable diseases like hiv before being able to marry [source]
  • in iowa, 709c was used until may 2014 to require hiv+ people to serve up to 25 years in prison and register as sex offenders if they engaged in sexual conduct with hiv- people, regardless of whether or not infection occurred [source]

supporters of these laws claim that they are protecting at-risk groups but they are actually typically championed by conservative, racist, homophobic, and anti-sex education politics. but don’t just take my word for it!

“Policies and laws that create HIV-specific crimes or that impose penalties for persons who are HIV-infected are unjust and harmful to public health around the world.” - HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America [source]

Most of these laws are appallingly broad. And many of the prosecutions under them have been wickedly unjust. Sometimes scientific evidence about how HIV is transmitted, and how low the risk of transmitting the virus is, is ignored. - Edwin Cameron, openly HIV+ South African Justice [source]

The overly broad application of criminal law to HIV non-disclosure, exposure and transmission raises serious human rights and public health concerns. - United Nation AIDS Guide [source]

anonymous asked:

I have an alternate history where, during the AIDS crisis, mandatory quarantines where put in place for all HIV+ people. I know HIV can be passed from mother to child, but can a baby born the virus pass it to their child and so on? It's in a future setting, so medicine has advanced (they might even be more medicaly/sciencey than the non-quarantined because they came up with all of the life saving/extending stuff). How might "genetic HIV" affect their health and everyday lives?

Hey nonny! This is really interesting, and I’d be interested in reading your story when it’s done…. but you have some research to do before you get started.

I hope you’re aware that a lot of the context around HIV is actually homophobia. In fact, HIV wasn’t called HIV at first – it was called Gay Related Immune Deficiency (GRID) in a time when gay was a dirty word. So understand that what you’re calling “quarantining HIV” would amount to a sequestering of, in large part (though far from exclusively), gay men. (And intravenous drug users.)

….You see where this is going, right? A majority “quarantines” a vulnerable population because they’re a “threat to the society at large”, complete with “scientific justification”. This is also in a time when the disease was soundly ignored and research was underfunded because the victims were gay men.

You’re basically looking at some really strong comparisons to Nazism and concentration camps in America in the 1980s. And unless you’re writing something horrifyingly dystopian – in which case go ahead!! – you need to be prepared for that perception from your readers.

What I am saying is this: spend a lot of time researching the disease and its history. And the social history of gay men in the 70s and 80s through today. And the history of antiretroviral medications. In fact, further down, I’m going to give you a read/watch list. It will be far from complete. But it will be a start.

I have a good news / bad news moment for you as well. The good news is that HIV isn’t genetic. It’s not carried down from mother to child via DNA transmission or even viral load entering the bloodstream of the fetus in utero.

So how do babies get HIV? Well, birth is a messy, bloody, poopy business. Neonates become infected when they’re delivered through a bloody  bloody birth canal and the blood enters their mucus membranes (eyes, mouth, etc). Also, babies drink bodily fluids for the first 6 months of life, which is definitely a transmission vector for the disease.

From a WHO page on mother-to-child transmission:

The transmission of HIV from a HIV-positive mother to her child during pregnancy, labour, delivery or breastfeeding is called mother-to-child transmission. In the absence of any intervention, transmission rates range from 15% to 45%. This rate can be reduced to below 5% with effective interventions during the periods of pregnancy, labour, delivery and breastfeeding. These interventions primarily involve antiretroviral treatment for the mother and a short course of antiretroviral drugs for the baby. They also include measures to prevent HIV acquisition in the pregnant woman and appropriate breastfeeding practices. 

So first off, the chance of any child of an HIV-positive mother getting HIV are less than one in two. Second, again, the virus isn’t “genetic” in its transmission. So if a child of an HIV+ mother was infected, the odds of them transmitting the disease to their child is the same as it was for them. It’s not a guarantee.

Also understand that if medicine is “more advanced” than it is today, and we already have cases of HIV being completely eliminated from people’s bloodstreams with modern medications, your society would likely get to a place where HIV can be, if not eliminated, made far less of a global crisis.

In fact, you mentioned medicine being “more advanced” inside of the “quarantine” than outside of it. But this isn’t likely, because you have to understand that the “quarantined” area is wholly dependent on the outside. They only get what they’re given (or can monkey-wrench from what they have). And separate but equal is inherently unequal. They’re social pariahs, they’re the underheels of society – they won’t be given the tools to advance beyond the society around them. If anything they’ll be the subjects of unwilling experimentation and get gaslighted into horrendous conditions with the vague and distant promise of a cure.

Here’s the thing about HIV (that, admittedly, wasn’t well understood at the beginnings of the disease): Without blood to blood or sexual contact it’s almost impossible to contract. You can’t get it from saliva without (drinking a liter of it). You can’t get it from sweat.

So I’m going to give you some homework to help you understand the background of the story you want to write.

First, films, because they’re easy and fast and will get you up to date as quickly as possible. There’s a list from Verywell (which, admittedly, I don’t love completely) with a list of films portraying HIV in culture.

I would start with #9, a movie called And The Band Played On. (It’s even on YouTube if you don’t mind a little piracy). It’s the story of how HIV came to be understood, told from the scientific side, and dealing with all of the prejudices of the Reagan administration. Philadelphia is also amazing and a must-watch. Angels in America was supposed to be phenomenal (I haven’t had the chance to see it yet).

Also do some searches on HIV and then-president Reagan, and how he dealt with –  or, more accurately, did sweet fuck-all about – HIV. It’s the story of one of the biggest failings in American history (and there have been some whoppers of failures!).

I also reached out to lovely blogger poztatt, who has commented on this blog in multiple instances about the relationship between medicine as a whole and HIV, and here’s what Pozzy had to say:

One : Transmission.  Here in BC vertical transmission has been pretty much eliminated due to good regimens.  We can, if we know about it, prevent it by using pre-existing regimens with mothers so they don’t transmit it.  Clinical guidelines are that mothers have to be on the medication (there are actual legal cases of women being charged for reckless endangerment and/or negligence for not informing doctors of their status.  Also all women in Canada that are pregnant are automatically tested.  It’s less thrilling, human rights wise, than I personally like but that’s Canada.

Second : Well, you’re sort of right about quarantine.  Fun fact : it actually is legally entirely possible to quarantine someone with a public health threat - aka communicable diseases.  Second fun fact in 1987 there was a bill proposed here in BC called Bill C34 that would have sent all people with HIV / AIDS to a leper colony island in the Georgia Straits. 

It got defeated but it had components cannibalized and put into the health care acts that allows quarantining of people with communicable diseases.

Though it’s not been enacted as there are no precidents for it outside Ebola.

So while it’s not presently a thing, it was proposed in multiple jurisdictions across N. America.

Also location is important. Sidenote: In N. America it landed in the gay male community and hit white gay men hard.  They had influence and power, as well as money, so they made noise.  It ALSO hit injection drug users and other sections of the gay community but they had less social cache to fight for care.Outside of N. America it’s predominantly location dependant. Huge swathes of African countries it’s heterosexual.  When writing about it (for the question) it’s important to note the different history depending on WHERE it’s being written about.

Poz also recommends the films When We Rise and How to Survive a Plague, as well as reaching out to your local LGBT centers and seeing if your city has an LGBT archive.

If anyone has additional resources for the Nonny here, leave a comment. I’ll screenshot them in a day or two, or copypaste, and reblog this with additional resources.

Best of luck,

xoxo, Aunt Scripty

disclaimer    

Becoming a Patron lets you see the freaking future. Have you considered becoming a clairvoyant?

Free eBook: 10 BS “Medical” Tropes that Need to Die TODAY! 

anonymous asked:

Lolz if ur anti-pro life than ur obviously pro death. Nice job asshole

Actually, it’s the “pro-‘life’” movement I’m against, not just “life” in general - obviously, otherwise I would probably be dead myself.

The pro-“life”/anti-abortion movement is extremely pro-death, though. Almost 70,000 women die and 5,000,000 more suffer from serious, life altering injuries every single year as a result of not being able to access a safe, legal abortion.

The pro-“life” movement is also notorious for their acts of terrorism - there’s even an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to their incidents. They have murdered, attempted to murder, and conspired to murder/harm many people who provide abortion services. They’ve also committed and attempted to commit other acts of terrorism including bombings and arson.

A few years ago, pro-“life” politicians in Texas passed a bill basically defunding Planned Parenthood. Their maternal mortality rate has since doubled, and the search for illegal abortion inducing drugs or at-home abortions has risen. 

Pro-“life” groups across the country just yesterday cheered as their president signed an executive order to reinstate the Global Gag Rule - which has in the past lead to a 40% RISE (or +2,000,000 annually) in (most likely unsafe) abortions and countless deaths globally. They most likely cheered as they don’t want to see “their” money go towards abortion, but fortunately for them it’s been illegal for federal funding to pay for abortion in foreign countries since the 70′s. They instead were simply cheering the defunding of HIV-prevention programs, domestic violence care/protection programs, facilities that provide contraception that prevents the abortions they claim to despise so much… I could go on, but you get the point.

The pro-“life” movement refuses to protect anyone’s life. They want to ban or defund anything that could possibly prevent unintended pregnancy or reduce abortion rates and will promote anything that has been proven to kill pregnant people. 

If you want to know what it’s like to be actually pro-life, spend some time hanging around with the pro-choice movement. You’ll see a reduction in abortions and in maternal mortality.

veganvenom  asked:

Prompt: Courfeyrac leaves his bag in the Musain after a meeting. Combeferre picks it up, intending to return it to his friend later, but it's unzipped and a load of books tumble out. They include "A Very Short Introduction to Butterflies and Moths", "Philosophy for Dummies" and "How Scientists Think".

“Yeah, I think that should work. I’ll make a facebook event and email Planned Parenthood when I get home.” Combeferre places the minutes from today’s meeting in a folder and slips it into his messenger bag, alongside his laptop.

“Sounds good!” Enjolras’s glance strays from Combeferre’s face for a moment and Ferre turns to see Grantaire leaving the cafe.

“Why don’t you head home now? I can tidy up,” he says, a knowing smile tugging at his lips.

“What? Oh–thanks, yeah, I think I’ll just–R! Hey, about what you said earlier…” Enjolras is gone in about three seconds, and Combeferre shakes his head in amusement as he turns to examine the back room of the Musaine. A few chairs need to be pushed in still, and he throws away a stray napkin before coming across a bright yellow backpack. He reaches down to pick it up, intending to drop it by Courf and Marius’s apartment.

The moment he lifts it up, the bag’s contents scatter across the floor, several loud thumps startling Ferre and making him start. Dammit…he really should have remembered that Courf’s zipper is broken, Combeferre thinks as he kneels down to gather the contents. There are a few pamphlets on HIV prevention form their last meeting, a truly ridiculous number of vanilla chapsticks, a spare pair of socks, and more books than should reaonably have fit in a bag this size.

Placing the smaller items back in the bag, Combeferre gathers the books and examines their titles with interest. Encyclopedia Insectae, Philosophy for Dummies, A Brief History of Time…Combeferre has turned off the light and sprinted down the street, backpack clutched in his arms, before he can see the rest of the covers.


“You stole my books!”

“Ferre? What are you doing here?” Courfeyrac, clad only in an oversized t shirt and boxers, looks at Ferre in confusion as he stands in his doorway.

“You stole my books!” Ferre repeats, holding the yellow backpack out. “I’ve been looking for these for weeks; I needed the Encyclopedia for one of my essays.”

“Oh.” Courfeyrac’s face is flushed as he stands there, holding his bag awkwardly. “I’m sorry, I just–um–I wanted to–have a conversation. With you.” He can’t meet Ferre’s gaze, and shifts back and forth in his stocking feet.

“You–what?”

“I wanted to have a conversation!” Courf finally looks up, biting his lip nervously before he continues. “Ever since we started college, it seems like we’re talking less and less…you’ve got Joly to talk about biology and astronomy and stuff and there’s no time for all our little adventures. We haven’t had one of our midnight picnics in the park since we graduated high school…I know it’s silly and of course you’re going to make new friends and that’s ok, obviously, but I just thought if I understood some of what you’re studying, maybe you’d talk to me more…”

“Courf–”

“I just. Miss you.” Combeferre’s heart breaks a little at those words, as he gazes down on the face of one of his two oldest friends. 

“I miss you too.” Ferre steps forward and wraps his arms around Courfeyrac. “You know you’re one of the most important people in my life, though, right? And I honestly love that we can talk about things other than my classes, talking to you is like…” like a breath of fresh air, like my heart turns into a giant moth that’s fluttering in my chest, like… “It’s a relief.”

Courfeyrac pulls back a little at that, blinking in surprise. “It is?”

“Yes!” Combeferre exclaims. “I love talking to you more than anyone, Courf.”

“Oh.” The word falls out softly, and that beautiful, sunny smile Ferre loves so much slowly appears on Courf’s face. “I feel the same way…do you want to come in, Ferre? It’s kind of cold out.” He steps aside and Combeferre enters the small apartment, watching him set his bag near the door and turn back around.

“I’m sorry if you’ve felt left out, Courf, I know I’ve been busy. Do you want to do one of our Disney marathons tonight maybe?” As he says it, Ferre notices the constellation print on Courf’s shirt, which is several sizes too large.

“That would be great,” Courf says brightly.

“Oh, and one more thing, Courf.”

“Yeah?”

“Is that my shirt?”

“Oh! Um, yes. I–uh–it was because–” The sight of a thoroughly flustered Courfeyrac stirs something deep inside Combeferre, and he finds himself laughing out loud.

“I…think I know why,” he says softly. He steps forward and suddenly their lips are pressed together, his arms around the smaller man as they both shake with silent, giddy, relieved laughter. 

The books are forgotten and the next time Ferre sees them, he is placing them on the shelf he and Courf just built together.