Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!rutgers!usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!limonce@pilot.njin.net From: limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) Newsgroups: sci.med.aids Subject: Re: Is it attempted Murder? Message-ID: <27463@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> Date: 27 Sep 89 05:21:40 GMT References: <27434@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> Sender: news@CS.UCLA.EDU Organization: Drew University/NJIN Lines: 77 Approved: aids@cs.ucla.edu Archive-number: 1262 In article <27434@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> Tom.Mickus@f440.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Tom Mickus) writes: > We all of course remember the controversial PBS documentary of some > years back, describing such behavior as practiced by a black street > person. Do you mean a black street-person or was it an unconscience typo meant to say, "back-street person". (this is off the track about what you suggest, but it is relevant) Today was Multi-Cultural Awareness day at Drew University. All classes are canceled and from Monday night until late Tuesday night speakers and events are planned. I attended a panel about AIDS and was surprised to find that so many people were in favor of quarenteen for PWAs or HIV+ people. It was interesting that one of the panel members mentioned that America is one of the few countries that has anything like quarenteen for certain diseases. Cuba is "locking up" anyone suspected to be HIV+, and it's resulting in a McCarthy/Hitler (ok... I admit that's a bit overly strong depiction) situation. The suspects are placed in jails; usually in solitary confinement. MOST IMPORTANTLY: It isn't working and AIDS is still on the increase. So, avoiding all the social/human-rights issues, on a medical level it just doesn't work. > Perhaps even more pertinent, how does society protect its citizen's > from such an "attack"? Hard questions...no easy answers. Ultimately, we "Attack" -- What a strong word. [more deleted] > The answer? Some how mutual masturbation doesn't seem like a long > term solution. Strict monogamy? I guess, but that's old fashioned. What > about tightly screened sex clubs? If everyone is carefully tested, and > agree to put some restraint on their behaviour, then it seems that such an > idea would work. That way people could get the variety they've been > looking for, without the risk. However, one could foresee abuses even > here. Its all a question of trust, and simply put, its easier to put your > trust in one person whom you live with, than in a group of people you only > meet occasionally. How about more effective education? The W.H.O. has realized that AIDS education can not exist in a vaccum, but it must be completely orientented towards the person's ethnographic background. That's when it becomes effective. The other thing (now that I'm on my soapbox) that I encourage is "the sexual interview". (not my idea, but I can't remember the person that coined the term). This is not a serious/scientific discussion to be held between you and a partner, but before "the act" one should discuss as casually as possible things like birth control, safer-sex issues, and past partners. As you sit in the bar/dorm/etc and talk, you can ask those questions in subtle ways. The person that coined the phrase even suggested that it become part of foreplay; some of those questions can be exciting when talked about :). The difficult question is to ask if the person is HIV+, yes, just ask directly out and possibly find when that person has had their last blood-test (if any). The whole technique can be hidden as conversation and becomes second nature to many people. > Just a couple of thoughts on some aspects of the AIDS dilemma. Some (mostly) related thoughts on, well, things that were on my mind today. :) > Uucp: ...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!stjhmc!250!440!Tom.Mickus > Internet: Tom.Mickus@f440.n250.z1.fidonet.org -- Drew University -- Tom Limoncelli C M Box 1060 -- limonce@pilot.njin.net P O Box 802 -- tlimonce@drunivac.Bitnet Madison, NJ 07940 -- 201-408-5389