Digital Technologies Changing the face of HIV Prevention

via Advocate.com, by By Gurmit Singh & Christopher S. Walsh

Why are we so fixated on finding a medical solution when, as social networks revolutionize sex in our community, gay men are successfully using new technology to combat HIV?

More and more gay men are hooking up online. The explosion of “Gaydar culture” through Xtube, Manhunt, Adam4Adam, and Grindr can increase risky sexual behavior, spawning fears of a new wave of HIV infections, particularly among young gay men. Yet, as new digital technologies change the way we enjoy sex and experience relationships, they are also changing the face of the AIDS response in remarkable ways.

In recent years, the global AIDS establishment has become fixated on medical approaches to HIV prevention. The success of antiretroviral therapies and new clinical trials on pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) have transformed the field, and “Treatment as prevention” is now promoted by the US PEPFAR, UNAIDS and the WHO.

The prospect of ending the HIV epidemic with a simple pill is seductive – but falsely so.

Fuelled by disparity and discrimination, HIV slams communities on the margins of society. Gay men have experienced this since the beginning of the epidemic, yet the medical establishment continues to advocate for chemical “quick fixes” to an exceedingly complex social problem. We cannot let these medical – albeit important – scientific advances distract us from what social science researchers have been telling us for years: the roots of this epidemic lie in the lack of health and human rights for gay men, other men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender people in the developed and developing world.

Fortunately, just as we did at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, our communities are taking the lead in tackling these fundamental challenges. As digital technologies become integral to our lives, they have become equally central to innovative HIV education, prevention and care efforts. These technologies enable us to work together in ways never before possible, offering unprecedented opportunities to tackle the many barriers that make our communities vulnerable to HIV.

Read the Rest.


[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]

The death of sex?

Via Salon, by Tracy Clark-Flory.

 In case you've missed these dispatches, allow me to fill you in on what you've been missing (aside from sex, apparently): First, the New York Observer ran an article proclaiming, "Young New Yorkers no longer care about having sex." Meg Wolitzer, author of "The Uncoupling," a magical realist novel about a sex-strike, followed up with a commentary in the New York Times about whispers in her friend circle of 40-plus women about growing "sexual disengagement." That brings us to this past weekend, which saw the publication of a Times Op-Ed by Erica Jong lamenting the sexlessness of young women today.

This concern isn't new, it's just the latest in a long history of arguments about how sex is being corrupted or destroyed. Previously, cultural commentators put the blame on the pervasiveness of pornography and sexually aggressive girls who scare boys out of their boners; and let's not forget the ever-present argument that sex before marriage is sinful and perverse. It seems that no matter the state of the current sexual union, someone somewhere is gravely concerned that everyone else is doing it wrong. More often than not, though, concerns about what other people are doing behind closed doors are really just our own projected anxieties about sex -- whether it's about what goes on in our own bedrooms, or our ability to maintain some semblance of control over the driving force of desire.

Beyond this customary nosiness, these recent reports specifically reflect current anxieties. What all three pieces have in common is that they link this alleged sexual malaise to technology. The Observer piece claims that young New Yorkers are more enamored with the smooth body of their iPhones than actual human flesh, more invested in upping their number of Twitter followers than notches on their bedposts. These caricatured young professionals get off on onanistic maintenance of their Facebook profiles, not on real-life human interaction. It strikes me that this is really just a way of expressing the depth of despair over the fact that, as I've written in the past, we feel "more connected, and yet more isolated, than ever."

Sex often stands in as a marker of personal and relationship health. As Wolitzer, who also gave a nod to the "seductions" of Facebook, Wikipedia and pornography, wrote in the Times, "[I]t's as if we still believe sex equals strength, health and life; and therefore, not-sex equals weakness, illness and death." Maybe it isn't as simple as that, but the connections are certainly there. Pointing the finger at technology -- whether it's addictive social media or the abundance of online pornography -- is a way to escape the uncomfortable self-examination that follows from asking whether we're intentionally avoiding something and, if so, what. It's no surprise that Jong pinpoints it: "We want to keep the chaos of sex trapped in a device we think we can control."

Read the rest here.

[If an item is not written by an IRMA member, it should not be construed that IRMA has taken a position on the article's content, whether in support or in opposition.]