TV commercials always seem to be out to frighten heterosexual men into using condoms for protection from HIV. While I agree that men should ALWAYS use condoms and that heterosexuals can get HIV, the fact is that in North America female-to-male HIV transmission thru vaginal sex is EXTREMELY rare. It's so rare that I read about a doctor at an HIV clinic in Seattle who says in his five years at the clinic he does not know of even one case of a man catching it from a woman thru vaginal sex.
My question is this: Why aren't the highest-risk groups -- homosexual men and needle-injected drug users -- being targeted as vigorously as heterosexual males? I've also heard that since 1990, the disease has remained contained within the high-risk groups in North America.
If we're ever going to get rid of HIV/AIDS it seems to me that the best way is to deal with the matter head on and teach awareness to the highest-risk groups. There are so many different things that come together to answer your question, so bear with me.
Firstly there are advertisements out there for all men, just in different ways...
Secondly there have been several important changes in the high risk groups over the past few years. I just don't have the article in front of me so I can't tell you which. But I know it's heterosexual women who are rapidly rising among the ranks of high-risk groups.
Okay, explanations :)
There's a rising percentage of married men who describe themselves as hetero but they have unprotected sex with men on the side. A slang term for it is being on the DL. They keep this as a secret from absolutely everyone and and continute to have unprotected sex with their wives. It's very easy for a husband who got HIV from having unprotected anal sex to then transmit it to his unsuspecting wife. A man on the DL who used condoms with all of his partners would greatly reduce the risk of spreading any STDs.
Also when a man and a woman are single or in a new relationship the man is usually the one who doesn't want to use a condom and often the woman gives in. So advertising to hetero men that condoms are important is worthwhile. It decreases the pressure that men put on women to have unprotected sex.
As for why they don't advertise condoms to gay men on tv well there's a few reasons for that... Haven't you noticed that whenever any ad on tv is about anything sexual (condoms, ky jelly, ED meds, herpes meds) they always make it a point to show a lot of married hetero couples with their rings displayed for all the world to see? We may have come a long way, but if the makers of these products are afraid to even advertise to unmarried hetero couples for fear of the backlash. Imagine their fear of doing ads for gay men.
There is a lot of outreach to gay men about condoms. But remember, not all gay people are "out" to the same degree. So you have to be a little more creative than setting up a booth on the side of the road with pamphlets and condoms.
Also, 25 years ago it was gay men that had to deal with AIDS all on their own because the rest of the nation labeled it the "gay disease." And that didn't start changing until children and heterosexual adults started contracting HIV through blood transfusions. (You can't get it that way now thanks to blood screening protocol.) So I'd argue that gay men have more awareness about why condoms are important than hetero men do.
The major concern with gay men now I believe is the combo of crystal meth and unprotected sex. Huge problem now.
Hope that my stuff gave you some more things to think about. It's really such a complex issure. Universities offer classes on this stuff and it's still not enough time to get through everything. (sigh) cuz for some reason hetero guys still think they cant get anything... sad but true... that most logical reason is that there are more people who are hetrosexual.
The second best reason is that there are other unplesant diseases that can be passed female to male, and especially male to female and that pregnancy is a common side effect of unprotected sex.
The final reason, and this is variable based on the local market - but conservative awareness groups might not care as much for the health of hardcore drug users or promiscuous homosexuals. Sort of a "get what you deserve" attitude toward them. Granted that's just a theory and there's plenty of cases to the opposite if you look for them, but then again you were asking about the lack of. It's all in the name of being politically correct.
Our society used to shun homosexuality. (At least in the light).
Now we have gay icons and TV shows that virtually glorify the gay life.
With all of this "progress", it wouldn't be right to continue identify HIV with homosexuals.
Who cares about statistics?
As long as no one gets their feelings hurt. well the matter is not just about homosexuals ....i agree the hetrosexuals are still at large the most numbers and the ones who kinda invented this disease were hetro too.....its not about the sexual prefrence its just everyone who has it.... The high risk groups might be offended if they were singled out. We are also supposed to pretend there is nothing wrong with being a queer. | 