HIV-1: Scapegoat for religious extremists and biogots

I havent mentioned anything about Ugandas Evangelical-driven quest to kill homosexuals.

I figured that you dont really need to have my expertise in HIV-1 to recognize that these people are fucking psycho.

But, it doesnt take a whole lot of effort for me to demonstrate that on a scientific level, these people are wrong (not surprising since its religious nuts fueling this fire, and they think the universe began 6000 years ago and believe in talking snakes and shit)-- killing every homosexual in Uganda would have little effect on HIV-1 infections/deaths.

Anyway, heres the deal.

Percentage of HIV-1(+) who are children (0-14): 13.8%
Teenage women infected with HIV-1 (15-19 years old): 2.6%
Teenage men infected with HIV-1 (15-19 years old): 0.3%
Young women infected with HIV-1 (20-24 years old): 6.3%
Young men infected with HIV-1 (20-24 years old): 2.4%
Percentage of HIV-1(+) adults who are women: 59%
Percentage of female sex workers who are HIV-1(+): 47.2%-60%

Homosexual men have nothing to do with all those babies/little kids being infected. The young ones were infected in the womb or during birth, from their HIV-1(+) mom. Homosexual men have nothing to do with all those young girls/women being infected with HIV-1. Why arent arent boys of the same age being infected, if its all teh homoz fault? Homosexual men have nothing to do with the fact that the majority of HIV-1 infections are in women. Homosexual men have nothing to do with the fact that if you go to a prostitute in Uganda, you have a 50/50 chance that prostitute is infected. Why the hell would a gay man pay for sex with a woman?

Homosexual men dont really factor into the HIV-1 problem in Uganda. The fact that homosexual men were the first to be hit with HIV-1 in the US is really just a side-effect of a random founder event, nothing more. Technically, if the 'straight' population were infected first, being gay would have been 'protective' from HIV-1 infection for a while. *shrug*

How do you think allllll these girls/women are being infected with HIV-1?

If we are going for a 'scientific' justification for killing a class of people in Uganda to prevent the spread of HIV-1, they need to kill heterosexual men, especially the ones visiting prostitutes. Theyre the ones spreading the disease.

*shrug*

I mean, if youre going to do genocide, you should at least do it 'right', right?

Unless, of course, preventing HIV-1 infections has nothing to do with your decision, as you just want to kill a group of people and HIV-1 is a convenient scape-goat to justify your inhuman behavior.

More like this

Im glad none of you accused me of joking or exaggerating when I told this story:A *very* common exchange I have with the general public regarding HIV-1: Person-- Where did HIV-1 come from?Me-- HIV-1 is related to a virus we can find in African primates, SIV. SIV crossed over from chimpanzees to…
A few weeks ago, Slate ran this pointed article about the FDAs refusal to allow homosexual men to donate blood. Quick summary: Yes, homosexual men are 'at risk' for HIV-1 infection. But the majority of HIV-1+ homosexual men are aware of their status, thanks to increased HIV-1 awareness in their…
Lack of Detection of XMRV in Seminal Plasma from HIV-1 Infected Men in The Netherlands These folks looked in the semen of HIV-1(+) men for XMRV-- because of XMRVs association with prostate cancer, and retroviruses as STDs, and because HIV+ people are more susceptible to infections than HIV- people…
This story has been making the rounds online-- Unlicensed Acupuncturist intentionally infects patients with HIV Unlicensed Acupuncturist Charged In 16 HIV Infections In Switzerland Swiss acupuncturist charged in 16 HIV infections Swiss "healer" accused of intentionally infecting 16 people with HIV…

biogots

I love neologisms -- and Abbie scores the first good one this year.

By D. C. Sessions (not verified) on 04 Jan 2010 #permalink

Perhaps they have a hidden agenda. If they kill the gays, god won't obliterate their country with ahmahgawd hellfire and brimstone id est Sodom & Gomorrah style.

This is not too surprising, in that nearly all the things that homophobes attribute to gay men are actually statistically more likely to attributable to straight men - pedophilia, for example, is much more common among heterosexual fathers, uncles, etc... molesting daughters, nieces, etc... and even the majority of pedophiles who abuse male children identify as heterosexual in primary orientation. There are a bunch of other examples out there, but a surprisingly large number of areas that people attack gay men with are actually characteristics of straight men that it is convenient to attribute to gay men.

Sharon

Reading TFA, it appears that the Ugandans are the ones who are deciding to execute homosexuals; and that the three evangelicals who believe that gays can be "cured" had nothing whatever to do with that decision.

Africans are full human beings capable of making their own value judgments. Uganda, and most of the rest of Africa, was a screwed-up place well before these three stooges went over there--take a moment to look up what happens to former "presidents" of Liberia, for example.

Execution of homosexuals in Africa has been going on for a very, very long time.

By Gabriel Hanna (not verified) on 04 Jan 2010 #permalink

D.C.-- Since you like it, Ill keep it!

Biogot (noun): Someone who misrepresents science to support their bigotry.

Sci Pundit-- That wasnt a typo. :P

I thought it was rather poetic that those three goons from the US get to finally see that hateful words and belief can translate into action if one is not careful.
I'm using this example for its simplicity and the fact that everyone knows about it and equates it with the black and white concept of evil. I'm not equating the holocaust to Uganda's anti-hate laws.
I don't think Hitler killed any gays, slavs, gypsies, or jews with his own hands, but his words sure gave a lot of people who already wanted to an excuse to do it and an excuse to hand over their neighbours, and it made those feelings OK to act on, and socially acceptable to voice.
Same with the 3 American evangelicals. Africa may already be pretty screwed up, and it may already be homophobic, but a bunch of American preachers go over there without knowing about Ugandan culture and history, and words that may cause some teabagging at home cause genocide in Uganda. The fact that Uganda is messed up doesn't excuse fire-stoking american preachers(who legitimized homophobia and exaggerated the immenence of an imaginary threat) any more than the fact that Prussia for the last couple hundred years was homophobic, xenophobic, and anti-semitic excuses Hitler for his role in the holocaust.
Don't they remember the part in the New Testament where Jesus says that if you hate a man, you kill him? If you commit a sin in your heart you commit it in action? Guess that little bit gets left in the dust. Every once in a while I hope that the Christian God is real and plays by his own rules so that people like this get the smiting they deserve, but I'll just have to settle for a lifetime of what is apparently guilt on the part of one of these pastors.

How do you think allllll these girls/women are being infected with HIV-1?

That's easy. Some gay men must have coughed or sneezed in their presence and the girls breathed in the HIV virus.

"Homosexual men have nothing to do with all those young girls/women being infected with HIV-1."

What a silly assertion.

In the first world we know for a fact that homosexuals are the prime vector for transmission of AIDS.

Sexual practices within african cultures might be relevant here...

While mass-murder might appear to be the wrong way of going about it, maybe a more subtle education campaign against homosexuality would be ineffective in Uganda?

By Vince Whirlwind (not verified) on 04 Jan 2010 #permalink

Vince Whirlwind:

What a silly assertion.

In the first world we know for a fact that homosexuals are the prime vector for transmission of AIDS.

What a stupidsilly assertion. It has been established for al;most two decades that heterosexual transmission, especially males and female prostitutes, has been the most common method of transmission in East Africa. The epidemiology is not that hard.

Sexual practices within african cultures might be relevant here...

You're just stretching for something to bash gays with. Homosexuality has had a rather negative historical impact on Uganda: In the 1880's Kabaka [King] Mwanga II of Buganda was known for his cruelty and aggressive homosexual practices against members of his court and others who had converted to Christianity. Many were killed brutally when they refused to submit to rape by the king. He also killed or expelled missionaries and demanded that all of his subjects reject Christianity. From that time, homosexuality has been held in disrepute. This is the historical setting that, along with recent missionaries, for the laws that have been proposed.

While mass-murder might appear to be the wrong way of going about it, maybe a more subtle education campaign against homosexuality would be ineffective in Uganda?

Pick:
1) crackpot
2) bigot
3) both

By natural cynic (not verified) on 04 Jan 2010 #permalink

Holy crap Vince, can't believe you're pro-mass-murder. I'm a pirate and I think it's wrong! natural cynic - nice comment, just missing a slap upside teh face.

Wonderful post ERV - but I think in the US homosexuals were the first to be hit hard by HIV partly because at the time it didn't seem necessary to use condoms for anal - it's not like you're going to get pregnant or anything. An early and strong education and marketing campaign for homosexual condoms use is part of the reason Australia hasn't been as badly effected as other countries.

Increasing condom use in Uganda would likely reduce the rate of infection (both homosexuals AND IMPORTANTLY with prostitutes!) There are plenty of issues marketing condom use though, it's not an easy thing. Especially as HIV passes more easily to the receiver (right?) and the health and well-being of prostitutes is probably not terribly important to their clients.

I dunno...is Vince well-known here? His phrasing seems a little too carefree for a bigoted crackpot...I'm thinking Poe.

#7 scrabcake

"any more than the fact that Prussia for the last couple hundred years was homophobic, xenophobic, and anti-semitic excuses Hitler for his role in the holocaust."

Hey Hey Hey Godwin and ease up on the Prussians there big fella, rumor has it Kaiser Bill was not adverse to skipping around the barracks from time to time.

The Prussians are just an exuberant heavily armed overenthusiastic people easily manipulated by failed Austrian watercolorists....that and an affinity for pointy hats seem to be their only flaws.

Pick on the Belgians instead, nobody likes them and they put mayo on their fries.

By Prometheus (not verified) on 05 Jan 2010 #permalink

What people are ignoring here is that the TalEvangelicals basically wrote the Ugandan Genocide Bill in its entirety. Sure, there was a receptive audience for their "kill the gays" fearmongering in Uganda, but nobody involved gets to avoid the blame - there's plenty to go around.

Re scrabcake @ #7

Actually, up until 1932, the Jews in Germany were the most liberated in Europe and were highly influential in the sciences and intellectual life of that country (Einstein, Born, Meitner, etc.). They were certainly better off then the Jews of France and Great Britain.

What people are ignoring here is that the TalEvangelicals basically wrote the Ugandan Genocide Bill in its entirety. Sure, there was a receptive audience for their "kill the gays" fearmongering in Uganda, but nobody involved gets to avoid the blame - there's plenty to go around.

Utter horseshit.

By Gabriel Hanna (not verified) on 05 Jan 2010 #permalink

I think it's of course wrong to put the blame on homosexuals in such bigoted way, but I also think it's not 100% correct to say that HIV-infected homosexual males have nothing to do with HIV infection on females. Simply because many of them are BIsexual, aren't them? Not that's really a question of "blame" though, to begin with, but of seeing the routes of infection
. Not that engaging in risky behavior aware of that isn't to be condemned, though, which of course is another discussion entirely that shouldn't even have the whole lynching part mentioned in less than 5 miles away.

Isn't ignoring bisexuals much of the faulty reason of those who say that the heterosexual risk is somehow negligible?

By random dude (not verified) on 11 Dec 2010 #permalink