AIDS Discourse
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The larger system of discourse on AIDS shows that the term, those affected by the disease, and our view of ourselves and our bodies has changed since the discovery of the first cases. In the beginning, AIDS was basically defined as a “gay cancer” that homosexual males were contracting in San Francisco and other heavily gay populated metropolitan areas (New York). As more and more information became available concerning the disease it was discovered that it was not germane to homosexuals and that it was a virus, not a cancer, transmitted through the exchange of bodily fluids, primarily semen and blood. Widespread panic, fear and misunderstanding were characteristic of the discourse surrounding the disease. Those affected by it, primarily homosexuals males during the first few years of its existence, were vilified by the religious right, scared heterosexuals and even those within the medical profession many of whom were in fear of direct contact with AIDS patients. Homosexuals did not help their own fight for identity and integrity by attacking politicians, the medical community and pharmaceutical companies using the epidemic as a weapon against homosexuality to stir up public fears against homosexuals, enact legislation that deprived homosexuals of their civil rights and even profit from their illness and certain death. Fear became so widespread that religious zealots on the right preached from their pulpits on high at the
. . .
Kramer dismisses the broader scope of elements involved, like the inadequacy of the U.S. Health system one in which 30 percent of all Americans remain uninsured. As more information has been discovered in the past decade, Stein argues that Kramer’s discourse is even less valid because it ignores other victims of the disease, “…as the spread of the disease is reduced in the gay community,…but moves into even more marginalized communities,…the notion of AIDS as a gay disease becomes ever less convincing and the failings of the U.S. healthcare system ever more apparent” (Stein 147).
Stein’s audience is homosexual and heterosexual alike and that is one of her primary points. She believes that Kramer’s metaphor for AIDS is self-serving to the extent that it is guilty of the same particularism of which he accuses the Jewish population. Stein’s tone is empathetic though. She wins her points and audience on both sides of the issue because she rationally presents her points that support her premise that AIDS discourse must be seen on a broader perspective in order to actually attack the roots of the cause. She understands that the Reagan-Bush policies were anti-gay but she also understands they were anti-minority and income level sp
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
War II, Bush NIH, San Francisco, Nation Kramer, Arthur Ashe, Maybe Kramer, Nazis Kramer, De-gaying AIDS, Reich Stein, Overall AIDS, status quo, aids epidemic, gay disease, gay community, medical community, discourse aids, rich white, aids gay, aids discourse, rich white heterosexual, white heterosexual, elite status quo, aids gay disease, users affected aids, drug users affected,
Approximate Word count = 2501
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
