Photo from www.pinknews.co.uk
A growing HIV epidemic is threatening our community.
I do not intend to pit HIV against other equally legitimate LGBT issues, such as same sex marriage or CBCP’s bigotry. But the epidemic demands our urgent action and our immediate attention . We need to act because no one else will until we do; we need to care because our solidarity and compassion are most needed now.
HIV is largely a hidden epidemic, and its scope will remain invisible until people undergo voluntary HIV testing and counseling. But the numbers that we are seeing are enough to give us a picture of what’s happening: more and more Filipino gays, bisexuals, other males who have sex with males (MSM), and transgenders (TGs) are getting infected with HIV. The prevalence has already reached more than 2% for our community, according to a survey that was done early 2011, though it is much higher in NCR, Cebu and Davao. 205 out of the 268 new cases that were reported last December – the highest in history – were due to unprotected male-to-male sex. That’s 7 new HIV cases a day that could be attributed to unprotected male-to-male sex. One could crudely assume that at least 7 MSM and TGs get infected everyday. (Download the December 2011 HIV and AIDS Registry)
Cold facts, but it doesn’t become real until it becomes personal. 2011 for me started with a number of friends getting tested positive. 2012 began with a news that a friend died months earlier, the circumstances pointing to an illness that cannot be named. He was the sixth person that I know who died because of AIDS-related diseases last year, the third in his own barkada. His was yet another case of late diagnosis. Like his other friends, once he started getting sick he simply disappeared and hid in his province. Within the community you’d hear nervous murmurings of friends or friends of friends who succumbed to the illness, their deaths swallowed by stigma and silence.
Yet we know that this shouldn’t be the case. HIV is preventable. There is no cure, but it is not a death sentence. I know that some of us feel uncomfortable talking about it, afraid that this would further discrimination and stigma. But our community is already stigmatized, and silence would only fuel the fear that has made it easy for the epidemic to fester. Silence would neither cure the stigma nor stop the virus.
Our best defense against the epidemic is our own community. We are, in a sense, each other’s family. While the love of our own family is irreplaceable, when love or understanding is difficult to find in our own homes, we find comfort and joy in the company of gay, bisexual, and transgender friends, from people like us, from our lesbian friends, from wonderful women – and men- in our midst. We are fellow travelers, our kinship strengthened by the reality that the journeys that we take are oftentimes not understood by many.
We take pride in our own resilience and strength – how we’ve confronted bullying in schools by striving to excel, how we’ve used our wit and diversity for our unique creations. We are brothers and sisters in this regard. We are known to fight back, to keep our heads high even when we’re deeply wounded, even when we feel alone.
But now we need that strength to care for each other. We actually know how we can stop the virus. We know that most cases are due to unprotected sex, and thus we need to teach ourselves how to practice safer sex. We know that treatment can save lives, and therefore knowing your status is important before it’s too late. We know that when necessary – and it will reach that point – those who have tested positive should get into treatment and other services that they would need for their entire lifetime.
Fear, however, oftentimes trumps evidence. Fear has gripped the lives of those who suddenly found the virus in their midst – there are those who feel that they lost their lust for life after knowing their status, that dark denial of life. I can never approximate how hard and how life-changing it must be to be HIV positive, but I am constantly inspired by stories from poz friends who affirm that life goes on, that life actually gets better, and that there are ways to make it better.
There will always be those who’d peddle fear as the solution to HIV, and we must be one in rejecting their doctrine. They would blame us, point to our ‘lifestyle’, and deny our existence: they would claim that their religion of fear is the only way to stop HIV. But we know what works and what doesn’t, and fear would only create the climate that would make it easy for the epidemic to explode.
Fear undermines our capacity to fight back. It creates an illusion, a source of false comfort for some, that this is a battle between those who are positive and those who are negative when in truth this is between us and the epidemic. We are actually all living with HIV. The sooner we realize that, the sooner we’d discover that with our collective strength, with our imagination and vast capacity for laughter, we shall prevail.
Poz here. Been diagnosed last September 2011. Thank God I had the courage to have myself tested. Now I’m on my regular ARV treatment and everything seem to have returned to normal. Life goes on and on and on. HIV is not the end of life.
Isn’t it about time to think and rethink what is it about the gay lifestyle that fuels the HIV/AIDS epidemic? I’ve got an article here about a Harvard professor who doesn’t think condom is the solution:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ni/2009/03/aids_expert_who_defended_the_p.html
Points to reflect upon:
1. That HIV is more of an ethical/moral issue than a medical issue as you can never contract this disease without a set pattern of behavior (i.e., taking IV drugs, sexual intercourse, etc.)
2. That HIV is not simply a matter of simple ignorance in this day and age where information can be easily obtained freely on the internet but a grave matter of gross negligence and irresponsibility (i.e., on the part of those who have multiple sexual partners)
3. That many sexually active LGBTs are in denial of the fact that condoms dont give 100% protection from HIV/AIDS in light of recent scientific studies thus putting everyone at risk and insisting that this equates to “safe sex”
4. That we as a whole need to redeem the true purpose and meaning of human sexuality as originally designed by its Creator.
5. That the practice of abstinence and chastity is largely scoffed off and turned down by many of us because it directly goes contrary to our desires to indulge our sexual appetite without restraint regardless of the consequences later on.
Face these issues. Now.
Thanks for the reply.
I’d like to say, though, that caution should be exercised in culling conclusions from other materials to avoid being perceived as dishonest. Contrary to what you said, the Harvard professor that you referenced didn’t say that condom is not the solution. In fact, he positioned himself away from the Pope’s stance. He said that condom distribution is not the sole solution – and I agree in that regard – and he even said that condom promotion in necessary in concentrated epidemic, which is what we are experiencing here. I don’t agree with his argument that condom promotion leads to risk compensation, and I think he is too hasty in attributing the failure to change risky behavior to condom promotion. The messages around interventions should be investigated, for instance, and self-esteem issues should be addressed.
As for your other points, this is exactly what I mean when I said that evidence is easily eroded by fear – when people brandish sinning as a tool to make people aware. That doesn’t work. We have evidence to prove that abstinence and monogamy alone do not work. What makes this all the more tragic is that 30 years into the pandemic, we’re still debating about this when we actually already know what works and what doesn’t.
@fullman
Thanks for the reply. I just want to ask why you said that abstinence and monogamy alone don’t work and can you cite me evidence to support your claim. In the context of HIV/AIDS prevention, of all the methods available out there, abstinence when taken seriously makes HIV/AIDS virtually irrelevant. An man who abstain from sex and practice chastity in the truest sense of that word has nothing to fear about HIV/AIDS or any STDs for that matter. It simply is irrelevant to him given that he is also well informed that HIV can also be acquired through other means outside of sex such as IV drug use, transfusion of infected blood, etc.
My question now is – why do LGBT people in general look down on chastity and abstinence? Does the LGBT community feel somehow alienated from the Gospel message of purity of heart?
Hi Albert. I note that you’ve skirted my remark about the need to be cautious and faithful in quoting ‘scientific’ studies, and I hope that my appeal would be considered. I note, too, that you opted to abandon your earlier claim that condoms do not work.
Abstinence and monogamy would work if people would practice them consistently. That’s the inherent weakness of both abstinence and monogamy – and you must admit that even in priesthood, a vocation founded on abstinence, 100% compliance is not possible. Hence, all these sex scandals involving priests. Assuming that for the sake of debate we could disregard the sex negative premises of this proposal, why, then, assume that LGBTs could do better?
The family planning policy of the GMA administration was based on abstinence. Did it work? Clearly not, since Our population is nearing 1999, and if it is not working as a family planning option, why privilege it as a strategy to combat HIV?
Hi, i’ve been a volunteer here in Africa and it will be my third year this April. I have worked with support groups, people living with HIV and now im volunteering with an organization that aims to influence polices to be more HIV/AIDS friendly at different levels. I worked with positive and mingle with positive individuals from day-to-day. It was a mind opener for me to learn a lot about HIV when i came here. I totally agree with all your points. Hopefully the government, especially the church, the people (negative or positive) will learn to open their minds on the reality of the pandemic and be conscious about it. Though, risky behavior and non-discipline contributes a lot. Stigma and discrimination is one of the biggest challenges, as even here it still remains a big challenge as it evolves as well.
“Our best defense against the epidemic is our own community.” — I like this line. It feels very much inclusive, empowering and uplifting. On that note, I think we should consider segments of the community who would want to talk about spirituality, emotions, love, and the bakla life in the Philippines. I’m talking about the bakla experience as shaped by intersectionality that is the Philippine setting, history, and cultural experience. Talking about spirituality, for instance, in the context of HIV and AIDS have been continuously raised and noted in MSM conferences in the country but we never really considered this as a variable to reach a segment of the community. I mean, if this is what the community wants to talk about because this is their context, diba?
Just thinking out loud.
Hi Jeff. I’m not saying that we should not talk about spirituality and faith, but I’m a little confused about your reply. What i’m getting from you is that we should use spirituality to reach a segment of the community, and that for me raises some questions, the first is that given the scale that we need to reach, is faith (say, the use of faith-based messages) the strategic approach to get that reach? It’s one thing to say that we should talk about faith (and there are groups doing this), it another thing to say that we should use faith to reach the segments in our community that we need to reach. If it’s the latter, while I agree that we should give space for that, I don’t that would help us scale up.
Sorry for getting you confused, Jonas. What I’m saying is we should consider talking about spirituality and faith among us, bakla community, when we talk about HIV. In the thesis that I am currently working on (not to preempt my thesis results), spirituality and faith are becoming central to the relationships of these seropositive concordant and discordant gay couples I’m interviewing. And interestingly, those who have this kind of “relationship with their faith” are still together until now, compared to those who doesn’t have that kind of relationship with their faith. I am not assuming that this is applicable to the entire gay community given the diversity of political and social purviews, arrangements, beliefs and practices, but I think we should start including faith when we discuss HIV. Filipinos are generally spiritual beings, and there are Filipino gays out there who strongly believes in faith, and I think the confusion (and the risk) comes when what they believe in disagrees with what their practice is. Why not create a fusion then? In previous MSM conferences, talking about faith has been raised by some gay groups but we never really considered including this in the response.
But like what you said, there are already groups who are already doing this. I don’t know, does that mean that we do our own separate way? Enlighten me.
I think my own confusion stems from having to second guess the objectives and the hows of your proposal. When you say ‘consider talking about spirituality when we talk about HIV’, what do you exactly mean? Which part of the whole range of HIV interventions do we include faith? In prevention? In pre and post test counseling? the example that you provided about couples maintaining their relationship is on its face – and again i am second-guessing your objectives – is a bit too normative.
i think some elements of our HIV interventions should facilitate a healthier processing of issues around the epidemic, including faith. Counseling should be ready to tackle faith when it is an issue for the individual or for those affected by HIV. But a blanket inclusion – as you suggest, ‘create a fusion’ – is rather dangerous. Whatever your religion is, faith is always a site of struggle. To inject it haphazardly in our HIV interventions simply because there is a perception that Filipinos are generally spiritual (isn’t this a bit homogenizing and essentializing?) can be dangerous, especially if there’s no clear reason other than it seems to be an issue for many MSM and TGs. I mentioned faith-based groups doing similar interventions because I wanted to ask you if referral is not enough.
I am not saying that we should conduct a blanket inclusion given that we have different beliefs (or we do not subscribe to any belief at all), but we should provide space in the response wherein we can talk about sexuality and religion – from prevention to counseling, to care and support of MSMLHIV & TGLHIV – particularly to those who need such space to comprehend things and to be enlightened. I recently met a young gay man who says that his casual sexual engagements is a form of rebellion against God because he could not contain his struggle, of fully accepting his sexuality. I feel that suggesting that he throws out faith or his religious beliefs out of the window is not an appropriate advise, he being raised in that particular religion for all his life. I’m thinking if we can come up with messages that marry sex positivity with religion or faith, while addressing HIV at the same time, we can address these kinds of concerns.
Thanks for clarifying. Sabi mo kasi fusion…
This is exactly where it’s tricky, Jeff. How do you exactly combine sex positive messages, religion, and HIV, without making stigmatizing judgements about, say, ‘casual’ sex? Kaya i’d rather we stick to the evidence and not equate risky sex with casual sex.
It should still be holistic because otherwise the feeling of rebellion – and while I am no expert in the field of counseling – I can assume, could extend to suicidal tendencies, say by not using condoms in one of his encounters. In the case of the rebelling young gay man, what do you think would be a better way to address his problem: (a) address the issue by saying that he should use condoms every time he has a sexual encounter, (b) address the issue of his rebellion against God that will calm him down and refrain from looking at his casual sexual encounters not as a form of rebellion but as a healthy and positive form of activity (I don’t know, I am starting not to believe that casual sex is the normative way to communicate among gay men – but this is not the point), or (c) both?
But Jeff, your example illustrates self-esteem issues, and so framing it according to faith might actually be limiting. Actually, your proposals ease out faith (‘casual sex is not a form of rebellion…’), hence it’s actually negating faith.
you see, my concern about integrating faith is this: where do we draw the line between faith as part of a self-esteem concern and faith as a tool of religion? in a stigmatized situation, it’s quite easy to conflate both, and that can be dangerous.
(and also, i’d stop here. my next post would be about LGBTs and faith. so, erm, pak!)
My issue about the rising numbers of HIV/AIDS related deaths among our friends and in the community is that we do not discuss AIDS as the cause of death with those who are most affected by it. I wonder how we can ever surpass this. I believe that the more we are silent about the unfortunate and heartbreaking loss around us, the higher the probability that it will spread.
But among friends, we still wait for those directly affected such as lovers, parents, and siblings to open to us about it. I just wish that they’ll be more open about their pain.
@fullman
I still hold fast in my belief that condoms do not work. Abstinence and monogamy is sufficient to work in and of itself. When people choose not to practice it, the fault is on the person and not the method per se. You should also ask yourself why, despite the availability of information on HIV/AIDS on the web and the relatively cheap price of condom that you can purchase in a convenience store, is the statistics continuing to shoot up. Apparently, something isn’t working right.
And since the primary mode of transmission of HIV/AIDS in the LGBT population is through sexual contact, what makes you think that by promoting condom use and hence the sexual act that the incidence of HIV/AIDS will decline. To put it very bluntly, to totally stop the rising incidence of HIV/AIDS among LGBT people, every single one of them must STOP having sex.
You might argue that this is almost impossible to accomplish in the real world and that it sounds more theoretical than practical. That’s why I personally believe that for anyone who does not want to go through this suffering must in himself learn to abstain from sex, educate himself, redefine one’s view on human sexuality as God intended it to be, and practice fidelity (among heterosexual couples only of course).
Are you up for the challenge?
You’re challenging me to be heterosexual? Sure, under one condition. Just like you, I have my own beliefs, and I believe that my sexuality is valid and legitimate. So I’d take your challenge if and only if you can be me – a gay man who has a healthy outlook towards sex, who enjoys male-to-male sex, and who realized that he likes men just because he likes men. If you can’t imagine yourself doing that, then voila, you’d realize how ridiculous it is to believe that you or any religion can change something intrinsic among us.
About your condom issue, we have evidence to show that majority of men who have sex with men do not use condoms bec condoms are not available. You may have beliefs contrary to that, but i’d side with evidence. If you think that abstinence and monogamy are the only solutions, sure, you’re free to believe so. You might want to check how things work with priests, but then you might realize that well, even abstinence fails among priests.
http://ph.news.yahoo.com/hiv-cases-rise-record-high-141953844.html
DOH reports all time high HIV cases.