Born a Homo? Part II.

[OCA]

Jim presented no facts at all, just his uninformed and bigoted opinion.

Your a relatively new member, this argument has been going on in various threads for about a year now. The right side, the anti gay marriage side has produced voluminous amounts of factual information as to the abhortrent lifestyle that is homosexuality and to the dangers it represents. My guess is Jimmy didn't have the time to pull up something that has been posted on here 100's of times.

 

[wade]

If we know that sticking your schlong in your buddy's shitpit or licking your best girlfriend's snatch is wrong but CHOOSE to do it anyway, why should we not judge them as wrong? Don't anybody give me any shit about judging others either, we say that murder is wrong(judgement), we say that shooting heroin is wrong(judgement), homosexuality is no different.

But that is not the question posed by this thread. You cannot use your bigoted position to avoid the actual question, which is what you are trying to do.

The question is "Are some people born homosexual?". Stop trying to obfuscate the issue at hand.

 

[OCA]

Sinners have no moral absolutes bud... hence why this arguement is here in the first place.. :/

Your missing the point, we have many moral absolutes in society: murder, stealing etc. etc., these are accepted as wrong no matter the situation and regardless of religion, homosexuality is no different.

 

[OCA]

But that is not the question posed by this thread. You cannot use your bigoted position to avoid the actual question, which is what you are trying to do.

The question is "Are some people born homosexual?". Stop trying to obfuscate the issue at hand.

And the answer is no. The homosexual leadership has for decades tried to find a link, an irrefuteable link they have been unsuccessful. It doesn't exist, its a lifestyle choice the same as if you decide to become a crackhead.

Bigot, lol thats the last refuge of someone losing the argument.

 

[5stringJeff]

"I don't see what the big deal is about same-sex marriages. Every married couple I know has the same sex all the time." - Club Ruminations
www.ruminate.com

 

[wade]

And the answer is no. The homosexual leadership has for decades tried to find a link, an irrefuteable link they have been unsuccessful. It doesn't exist, its a lifestyle choice the same as if you decide to become a crackhead.

Bigot, lol thats the last refuge of someone losing the argument.

There is pleanty of evidence. What you are saying is that because no "irrefutable link" has yet been found that that is proof one does not exist (ie: genetic homosexuality), which is an ridiculous assertion given how little we still know about the human genome.

No, Bigot is a term that applies to those who make judgements about others based upon prejudice, and this applies all to clearly to you, -Cp, =d=, and many others posting in this thread.

 

[dmp]

There is pleanty of evidence. What you are saying is that because no "irrefutable link" has yet been found that that is proof one does not exist (ie: genetic homosexuality), which is an ridiculous assertion given how little we still know about the human genome.

No, Bigot is a term that applies to those who make judgements about others based upon prejudice, and this applies all to clearly to you, -Cp, =d=, and many others posting in this thread.

So...you are both illogical and a hypocrit? Aren't you judging -Cp, -=d=-, and many others based on prejudice? You hate us because we want others to accept personal responsibility for their actions; instead of claiming to be a victim of a 'genetic flaw' which science has been unable to validate?

 

[wade]

So...you are both illogical and a hypocrit? Aren't you judging -Cp, -=d=-, and many others based on prejudice? You hate us because we want others to accept personal responsibility for their actions; instead of claiming to be a victim of a 'genetic flaw' which science has been unable to validate?

I'm judging people upon what they individually say, that is not prejudice. Prejudice is when you judge people you don't know based upon something different about them from what you consider "normal" or "superior".

I don't hate you. I just feel sorry for people who are so closed minded and ignorant.

And science has pretty much proven the case for people being "born a homosexual". As I pointed out, empirical evidence in the animal kingdom abounds to support this position. You can argue all you want about how people should be able to overcome this nature if they are born homosexual, but that is a different argument, the fact is some people are born homosexual and that is the issue at hand.

Wade.

 

[dmp]

I'm judging people upon what they individually say, that is not prejudice. Prejudice is when you judge people you don't know based upon something different about them from what you consider "normal" or "superior".

Not true.

prej·u·dice
* An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.
* A preconceived preference or idea.
* The act or state of holding unreasonable preconceived judgments or convictions.
* Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion.
* Detriment or injury caused to a person by the preconceived, unfavorable conviction of another or others.

None of those definintions of the word make 'Prejudice' apply to those who can see there is CLEARLY no signifcant, scientific research showing Homos are vicitims to a genetic flaw or trait. It's a word YOU Like to throw around because you enjoy insulting Truth, and those who believe it.

I don't hate you. I just feel sorry for people who are so closed minded and ignorant.

What am I ignorant of? I know how to read and comprehend what I read. I've read multiple scientific (non-biased) research which leads to the conclusion "A homosexual IS as a homosexual DOES"

And science has pretty much proven the case for people being "born a homosexual". As I pointed out, empirical evidence in the animal kingdom abounds to support this position. You can argue all you want about how people should be able to overcome this nature if they are born homosexual, but that is a different argument, the fact is some people are born homosexual and that is the issue at hand.

Wade.

Proven by whom? You cited a couple of studies which made speculations - and the Animal arugment has been shot down pretty well.

 

[wade]

Excuse me, I should have used "bigot" where I used "prejudice".

How has the animal data been shot down? It has not been that's how!

Wade.

 

[Trinity]

I'm judging people upon what they individually say, that is not prejudice. Prejudice is when you judge people you don't know based upon something different about them from what you consider "normal" or "superior".

I don't hate you. I just feel sorry for people who are so closed minded and ignorant.

And science has pretty much proven the case for people being "born a homosexual". As I pointed out, empirical evidence in the animal kingdom abounds to support this position. You can argue all you want about how people should be able to overcome this nature if they are born homosexual, but that is a different argument, the fact is some people are born homosexual and that is the issue at hand.

Wade.

Actually wade not according to this article...............


Is Homosexuality Genetic?
By A. Dean Byrd, Shirley E. Cox, and Jeffrey W. Robinson
There have been many articles published in various publications regarding homosexuality that do not reflect the scientific literature. In fact, their social advocacy suggests a greater reliance on politics than on science. Perhaps it is time to examine the innate-immutability, argument about homosexuality. In other words, are men and women born with a genetic propensity for same-sex attraction?

The issue is enormously complex and cannot he reduced to a simple nature vs. nurture" debate. Homosexual attraction, like many other strong attractions includes both biological and environmental influences. Scientific attempts to demonstrate that homosexual attraction is biologically determined have failed. The major researchers have arrived at such conclusions.

Dr. Dean Hamer, a gay researcher, attempted to link male homosexuality to a stretch of DNA located at the tip of the X chromosome, the chromosome that some men inherit from their mothers. Regarding genetics and homosexuality Hamer concluded:

"We knew that genes are only part of the answer. We assumed the environment also played a role in sexual orientation, as it does in most, if not all behaviors.... Homosexuality is not purely genetic…environmental factors play a role. There is not a single master gene that makes people gay. I don't think we will ever be able to predict who will be gay."

Hamer further states: "The pedigree failed to produce what we originally hoped to find: simple Mendelian inheritance. In fact, we never found a single family in which homosexuality was distributed in the obvious pattern that Mendel observed in his pea plants."

When the study was duplicated by George Rice with robust research, the genetic markers were found to be non-significant Rice concluded,

"It is unclear why our results are so discrepant from Hamer’s original study. Because our study was larger than that of Hamer’s et al, we certainly had adequate power to detect a genetic effect as large as reported in that study. Nonetheless, our data does not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position XQ 28.”

Dr. Simon LeVay, in his study of the hypothalamic differences between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men, offered the following criticisms of his own research, "It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain."

In commenting on the brain and sexual behavior, Dr. Mark Breedlove, a researcher at the University of California at Berkeley, demonstrated that sexual behavior has an effect on the brain. In referring to his research, Breedlove states:

"These findings give us proof for what we theoretically know to be the case--that sexual experience can alter the structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it. It is possible that differences in sexual behavior cause (rather than are caused by) differences in the brain." LeVay observed, "... people who think that gays and lesbians are born that way are also more likely to support gay rights."

A third study, which was conducted by researchers J.M. Bailey and Richard C. Pillard, focused on twins. They found a concordance rate of 52 percent among identical twins, 22 percent among non-identical twins and a 9.2 percent among non-twins. This study provides support for environmental factors. If homosexuality were in the genetic code, all of the identical twins would have been homosexual.

Prominent research team William Byne and Bruce Parsons, as well as psychiatrists R. Friedman and J. Downey, reviewed the studies linking biology and homosexual attraction. They concluded that there was no evidence to support a biologic theory but rather that homosexuality could be best explained by an alternative model where "temperamental and personality traits interact with the familial and social milieu as the individual's sexuality emerges.”

Are homosexual attractions innate? There is no support in the scientific research for the conclusion that homosexuality is biologically determined. Is homosexuality fixed or is it amenable to change? There is ample evidence that homosexual attraction can be diminished and that changes can be made. Particularly disturbing is the lack of media attention to the research reported in the Archives of General Psychiatry, which concluded that gay, lesbian, and bisexual people were at risk for mental illness, specifically suicidality, major depression, and anxiety disorder. While one might suggest that society’s oppression of homosexual people may be the cause of such mental illness, this may not be the case.

Gay activist Doug Haldeman, at a recent meeting of the American Psychological Association, focused on the right of individuals who were unhappy with their homosexual attraction to pursue treatment aimed at change. He stated,

"A corollary issue for many is a sense of religious or spiritual identity that is sometimes as deeply felt as is sexual orientation. For some it is easier, and less emotionally disruptive, to contemplate changing sexual orientation, than to disengage from a religious way of life that is seen as completely central to the individual's sense of self and purpose.... However we may view this choice or the psychological underpinnings thereof, do we have the right to deny such an individual treatment that may help him to adapt in the way he has decided is right for him? I would say that we do not."

Finally, lesbian activist biologist Dr. Anne Fausto-Sterling of Brown University, referring to the biological argument for the development of homosexuality, states,

"It provides a legal argument that is, at the moment, actually having some sway in court. For me, it's a very shaky place. It’s bad science and bad politics. It seems to me that the way we consider homosexuality in our culture is an ethical and a moral question.”

Much of the criticism aimed at those whose value systems view homosexual relations as unacceptable is based on the innate-immutability argument. The argument finds no basis in science. Regarding science and morality, Dr. Hamer stated, “...biology is amoral; it offers no help in distinguishing between right and wrong. Only people, guided by their values and beliefs, can decide what is moral and what is not." Homosexual relations are moral, ethical issues.

Those individuals who experience unwanted homosexual attractions have a right to treatment. Whether others agree is not as important as respecting that choice. Tolerance and diversity demand that they do so.

Related Editorial Thinking Clearly About Homosexuality


A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D. is a trained scientist and board Licensed psychologist who is a clinical psychologist and Vice President of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality located in Encino, California.

Shirley E. Cox, Ph.D., is a Licensed clinical social worker.

Jeffrey W. Robinson, Ph.D., is a licensed marriage and family therapist.

 

[dmp]

Excuse me, I should have used "bigot" where I used "prejudice".

How has the animal data been shot down? It has not been that's how!

Wade.

oooh! think of that all by yourself?

Bigot...hm.. prove it. Explain to the satisfaction of the viewers how the standpoint "Homos ARE as Homos DO" equates to biggotry.

Here's what a 'Bigot' is:

big·ot ( P ) Pronunciation Key (bgt)
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Now that we know what the word means, we can clearly see that nowhere in the definition is the phrase "...one who feels people should take accountability for their actions unless it can be PROVEN their actions are the result of genetic defects".


Again we have an example of a liberal throwing out 'shock' words because they lack reason/resonsibility in the behaviour they condone.

 

[wade]

Khafley,

Just what is that supposed to tell me? Other than that these 3 supposed scientists/researchers have an opinion? From people who, as it turns out, make their livings by "treating" homosexuals? These are not scientists, scientists start with no opinion. Do a little background on A. Dean Byrd, Phd., who clearly has a bible thumper agenda - in fact a devout Morman who's agenda is all too clearly tied to the Morman Church and BYU).

http://www.evergreen-intl.org/filecabinet/htmlfiles/byrd2.html

You still have not explained why about 1-2% of the warmblooded animals are homosexual.

Wade.

 

[Trinity]

Excuse me, I should have used "bigot" where I used "prejudice".

How has the animal data been shot down? It has not been that's how!

Wade.

here's some excerpts, it's a long read, but I think it shoots down your well animal's do it theory

http://www.tfp.org/tfc/animal_homosexuality_myth.htm

THE "ANIMAL HOMOSEXUALITY" MYTH

BY LUIZ SÉRGIO SOLIMEO

In its effort to present homosexuality as normal, the homosexual movement1 turned to science in an attempt to prove three major premises:

1. Homosexuality is genetic or innate;
2. Homosexuality is irreversible;
3. Since animals engage in same-sex sexual behavior, homosexuality is natural.
Keenly aware of its inability to prove the first two premises,2 the homosexual movement pins its hopes on the third, "animal homosexuality".3

ANIMALS DO IT, SO IT'S NATURAL, RIGHT?

The reasoning behind the "animal homosexuality" theory can be summed up as follows:

- Homosexual behavior is observable in animals.
- Animal behavior is determined by their instincts.
- Nature requires animals to follow their instincts.
- Therefore, homosexuality is in accordance with animal nature.
- Since man is also animal, homosexuality must also be in accordance with human nature.
This line of reasoning is unsustainable. If seemingly "homosexual" acts among animals are in accordance with animal nature, then parental killing of offspring and intra-species devouring are also in accordance with animal nature. Bringing man into the equation complicates things further. Are we to conclude that filicide and cannibalism are according to human nature?

In opposition to this line of reasoning, this article sustains that:

1. There is no "homosexual instinct" in animals,
2. It is poor science to "read" human motivations and sentiments into animal behavior, and
3. Irrational animal behavior is not a yardstick to determine what is morally acceptable behavior for rational man.
THERE IS NO "HOMOSEXUAL INSTINCT" IN ANIMALS

Anyone engaged in the most elementary animal observation is forced to conclude that animal "homosexuality," "filicide" and "cannibalism" are exceptions to normal animal behavior. Consequently, they cannot be called animal instincts. These observable exceptions to normal animal behavior result from factors beyond their instincts.


• Clashing Stimuli and Confused Animal Instincts

To explain this abnormal behavior, the first observation must be the fact that animal instincts are not bound by the absolute determinism of the physical laws governing the mineral world. In varying degrees, all living beings can adapt to circumstances. They respond to internal or external stimuli.

Second, animal cognition is purely sensorial, limited to sound, odor, touch, taste and image. Thus, animals lack the precision and clarity of human intellectual perception. Therefore, animals frequently confuse one sensation with another or one object with another.

Third, an animal's instincts direct it towards its end and are in accordance with its nature. However, the spontaneous thrust of the instinctive impulse can suffer modifications as it runs its course. Other sensorial images, perceptions or memories can act as new stimuli affecting the animal's behavior. Moreover, the conflict between two or more instincts can sometimes modify the original impulse.

In man, when two instinctive reactions clash, the intellect determines the best course to follow, and the will then holds one instinct in check while encouraging the other. With animals that lack intellect and will, when two instinctive impulses clash, the one most favored by circumstances prevails.4

At times, these internal or external stimuli affecting an animal's instinctive impulses result in cases of animal "filicide," "cannibalism" and "homosexuality."

Explaining Seemingly "Homosexual" Animal Behavior

Bonobos are a typical example of this "borrowing." These primates from the chimpanzee family engage in seemingly sexual behavior to express acceptance and other affective states. Thus, Frans B. M. de Waal, who spent hundreds of hours observing and filming bonobos, says:

There are two reasons to believe sexual activity is the bonobo's answer to avoiding conflict.

First, anything, not just food, that arouses the interest of more than one bonobo at a time tends to result in sexual contact. If two bonobos approach a cardboard box thrown into their enclosure, they will briefly mount each other before playing with the box. Such situations lead to squabbles in most other species. But bonobos are quite tolerant, perhaps because they use sex to divert attention and to diffuse tension.

Second, bonobo sex often occurs in aggressive contexts totally unrelated to food. A jealous male might chase another away from a female, after which the two males reunite and engage in scrotal rubbing. Or after a female hits a juvenile, the latter's mother may lunge at the aggressor, an action that is immediately followed by genital rubbing between the two adults.7

Like bonobos, other animals will mount another of the same sex and engage in seemingly "homosexual" behavior, although their motivation may differ. Dogs, for example, usually do so to express dominance. Cesar Ades, ethologist and professor of psychology at the University of São Paulo, Brazil, explains, "When two males mate, what is present is a demonstration of power, not sex."8

Jacque Lynn Schultz, ASPCA Animal Sciences Director of Special Projects, explains further:

Usually, an un-neutered male dog will mount another male dog as a display of social dominance-in other words, as a way of letting the other dog know who's boss. While not as frequent, a female dog may mount for the same reason.9

Dogs will also mount one another because of the vehemence of their purely chemical reaction to the smell of an estrus female:

Not surprisingly, the smell of a female dog in heat can instigate a frenzy of mounting behaviors. Even other females who are not in heat will mount those who are. Males will mount males who have just been with estrus females if they still bear their scent…. And males who catch wind of the estrus odor may mount the first thing (or unlucky person) they come into contact with.10

Other animals engage in seemingly "homosexual" behavior because they fail to identify the other sex properly. The lower the species in the animal kingdom, the more tenuous and difficult to detect are the differences between sexes, leading to more frequent confusion.

• "Homosexual" Animals Do Not Exist

In 1996, homosexual scientist Simon LeVay admitted that the evidence pointed to isolated acts, not to homosexuality:

Although homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in animals, seems to be a rarity.11

Despite the "homosexual" appearances of some animal behavior, this behavior does not stem from a "homosexual" instinct that is part of animal nature. Dr. Antonio Pardo, Professor of Bioethics at the University of Navarre, Spain, explains:

Properly speaking, homosexuality does not exist among animals…. For reasons of survival, the reproductive instinct among animals is always directed towards an individual of the opposite sex. Therefore, an animal can never be homosexual as such. Nevertheless, the interaction of other instincts (particularly dominance) can result in behavior that appears to be homosexual. Such behavior cannot be equated with an "animal homosexuality". All it means is that animal sexual behavior encompasses aspects beyond that of reproduction.12



http://www.tfp.org/tfc/animal_homosexuality_myth.htm

 

[wade]

oooh! think of that all by yourself?

Bigot...hm.. prove it. Explain to the satisfaction of the viewers how the standpoint "Homos ARE as Homos DO" equates to biggotry.

Here's what a 'Bigot' is:

big·ot ( P ) Pronunciation Key (bgt)
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Now that we know what the word means, we can clearly see that nowhere in the definition is the phrase "...one who feels people should take accountability for their actions unless it can be PROVEN their actions are the result of genetic defects".


Again we have an example of a liberal throwing out 'shock' words because they lack reason/resonsibility in the behaviour they condone.

And you are a bigot because you are intolerant of HOW OTHER PEOPLE CHOOSE TO LIVE THEIR LIVES, which does not effect you other than to violate your sensibilities.

Just because it's not yet been proven that homosexuality is genetic does not mean that it isn't. It could be decades before it is - you would use this lack of absolute proof as a justification for your bigotry and prejiduce until then?

And again, you have not explained away the homosexuality found in the animal kingdom. This provides emperical proof that homosexuality is indeed something that can be congenital.

Wade.

 

[Trinity]

Khafley,

Just what is that supposed to tell me? Other than that these 3 supposed scientists/researchers have an opinion? From people who, as it turns out, make their livings by "treating" homosexuals? These are not scientists, scientists start with no opinion. Do a little background on A. Dean Byrd, Phd., who clearly has a bible thumper agenda - in fact a devout Morman who's agenda is all too clearly tied to the Morman Church and BYU).

http://www.evergreen-intl.org/filecabinet/htmlfiles/byrd2.html

You still have not explained why about 1-2% of the warmblooded animals are homosexual.

Wade.

They are not homsexuals, they are ANIMALS helllloooooooooo. Do you invite your dog in for dinner? Does he sit at the table with you? and have an intelligent conversation? NO oh maybe because he's an ANIMAL!!!!!!

 

[wade]

Khafley,

Please stop throwing your Morman bullshit at me. The whole relgion is a crock.

Their proof is no proof at all. The fact is that homosexuality does exist in all warmblooded animal populations and there is no denying that.

Wade.

 

[dmp]

Khafley,

Just what is that supposed to tell me? Other than that these 3 supposed scientists/researchers have an opinion? From people who, as it turns out, make their livings by "treating" homosexuals? These are not scientists, scientists start with no opinion.

Not true - Science starts out with skepticism, not 'no opinion'.

You still have not explained why about 1-2% of the warmblooded animals are homosexual.
Wade.

Why would she feel the need to explain something which is not true?

weird.

 

[Trinity]

Khafley,

Please stop throwing your Morman bullshit at me. The whole relgion is a crock.

Their proof is no proof at all. The fact is that homosexuality does exist in all warmblooded animal populations and there is no denying that.

Wade.

I have a big news flash for you I'm not Mormon. Matter of fact I'm not even religous. Not saying I don't believe in god, I just don't believe in religions.


and all that so called mormon shit I was throwing at you that was just 1 link from each search I did there are numerous other sites that you can find the same info. on.

 

[MissileMan]

Could we get a link on this?

Because all I'm getting is your opinion!

Here's a link for you...read it carefully!

http://www.amfar.org/cgi-bin/iowa/programs/globali/record.html?record=34




Special Report: AIDS in Africa

Overview of the epidemic in Africa

While Africa is rife with war and ethnic conflict, AIDS is proving to be the continent's deadliest enemy. AIDS has killed at least ten times more Africans than all of the armed conflicts in Africa combined, and the epidemic is now the leading cause of death among Africans of all ages. Africa is home to 70 percent of the adults and almost 94 percent of the children living with HIV worldwide. In several African countries, between one-fifth and one-third of all children have already lost one or both parents to AIDS, and by 2010, 40 million children in Africa could be orphaned by the disease. According to the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), 25 million people are living with HIV/AIDS in the region.


Vast migration between rural areas and cities is one of the many factors facilitating the spread of HIV across the African landscape.

HIV is spreading in sub-Saharan Africa at a frightening pace, striking both youth and prime-age adults at alarming rates. In Botswana, 37 percent of adults are infected with HIV. In South Africa, 5.3 million people are living with HIV/AIDS—the highest number of any nation in the world. While Africa's southernmost tip remains the most fiercely ravaged by HIV/AIDS, infection rates are escalating in other regions of the continent. In Nigeria, the adult HIV prevalence rate is now 5.4 percent. In Ethiopia, over 8 percent of adults in the country are HIV-infected. And 6.7 percent of the adult population of Kenya is HIV-positive.
Plagued by widespread poverty and illiteracy, Africa is grappling with the pressures of rapid urbanization and vast population migrations. In the face of these obstacles, HIV continues its relentless assault. It is estimated that 2.2 million sub-Saharan Africans died of AIDS in 2003. Indeed, the epidemic is driving a downward spiral that is reversing many of the health and development gains of the past several decades.

AIDS primarily attacks adults in their most economically productive years, depleting household savings and leaving many families without a stable source of income. The epidemic is taking a serious toll on the agricultural, educational, and health care sectors in Africa, killing farmers, teachers, government workers, physicians, nurses, and other professionals. High HIV prevalence is exacerbating southern Africa's severe food shortage. (See sidebar to read an article on HIV/AIDS and famine in sub-Saharan Africa.) At the same time, the epidemic is increasing business costs through higher health and life insurance expenses, lower productivity, and increased absenteeism.



Video still from "More Time," a movie about adolescent love, sexuality, and AIDS shown in Zimbabwe. (Media for Development International)

In more than a dozen sub-Saharan countries, life expectancy will probably be 17 years shorter because of AIDS. This reduction in life expectancy will have devastating impact on sub-Saharan African economies. In South Africa, AIDS is expected to shrink the national economy by as much as $22 billion by 2010.

Providing access to care and treatment for the quarter of a million Africans now living with HIV/AIDS has emerged as a critical issue and was a central focus of the XIV International AIDS Conference held in July 2002, in Barcelona, Spain. Many economists and public health experts are calling for debt relief, so that poor countries stricken by the AIDS epidemic do not have to spend their limited resources paying off debts to rich nations, and can instead invest in essential education, health care, and social services. The high cost of antiretrovirals and the lack of adequate health infrastructure in the region have been cited as two of the main factors hindering treatment access.

There have been some important advances on the care and treatment front. Botswana was the first country to have a program designed to ultimately make available antiretrovirals to all of its citizens who need them. But, Botswana is significantly wealthier than other sub-Saharan African nations. The majority of national governments in the region have been slow in responding to the needs of their citizens living with HIV and antiretroviral therapy remains out of the hands of most people living with HIV/AIDS in the region.


___________________________________________

"In the developing world, basically every woman is at risk of acquiring HIV." —Zeda Rosenberg, Sc.D., Scientific Director, HIV/AIDS Prevention Trials Network, Family Health International

___________________________________________
Another key feature of AIDS in Africa is the biological and social vulnerability of women. Infection rates among young African women are far higher than those of young men; in some countries, the prevalence rate among teenage girls is five times higher than the rate among teenage boys. Millions of young African women are uninformed about HIV/AIDS. According to UNICEF, more than 70 percent of adolescent girls in Somalia, and more than 40 percent in Guinea Bissau and Sierra Leone, have never heard of AIDS.




(Photo credit: Patrick Coleman, JHU/CCP)

Social conventions and cultural traditions tend to subordinate women and they have little authority in their sexual relationships. Traditional practices such as polygamy, widow inheritance (which requires a woman to wed her late husband's brother), and a widespread preference for unlubricated or "dry sex" increase women's susceptibility to HIV. As elsewhere, poverty forces many African women to seek work in the commercial sex industry, and many young women have sex with older men, or "sugar daddies," to pay for their education, clothing, and other basic needs. While some men may wear condoms during commercial sex, they will not wear them during marital sex, and wives are often unable to negotiate condom use for fear of abuse or abandonment. Thus, while marriage may provide some level of economic and social security, it puts many African women at risk of HIV infection.


___________________________________________

"Child sexual exploitation is an open secret." —Virginia Petersen, Superintendent General of Social Services in the Western Cape, South Africa

___________________________________________
Although there is often denial among policy makers in sub-Saharan Africa, sexual exploitation of children is a serious problem and one that is exacerbating the AIDS epidemic. Men who fear HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases often turn to children in the belief that they are less likely to be infected. There is also a widespread myth in Africa and parts of Asia that having sex with a virgin will "cure" one of AIDS, which has resulted in an increased number of child rapes. Additionally, with the rise of sex tourism, child prostitution is increasing in many urban centers. Ironically, children orphaned by HIV often resort to prostitution as the only means of supporting themselves and their younger siblings.

The stigma associated with AIDS and the taboos surrounding discussions of sexuality have fueled the spread of HIV across sub-Saharan Africa. It is no accident that the first International AIDS Conference ever hosted in Africa was organized around the theme "Break the Silence." Because people with HIV/AIDS face severe condemnation and discrimination from family, neighbors, and co-workers, individuals are less likely to seek HIV testing, less likely to seek treatment, and less likely to practice risk reduction behaviors. And for many Africans, the risk of HIV infection is overshadowed by day-to-day realities of famine, war, and extreme poverty.


___________________________________________

"The women I work with say they'd rather die of AIDS tomorrow than die of hunger today." —Ann Waweru, Director, Voluntary Women's Rehabilitation Centre, Kenya

___________________________________________
Population mobility and commercial sex are two of the most important factors fueling the AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa. Modernizing trends, such as increased transportation and communication networks, have combined with factors such as environmental degradation and high unemployment to encourage migration to urban centers, as well as increased the numbers of migrant workers. Miners, truck drivers, traders, and military personnel are often away from their families for months on end and are a ready market for the commercial sex industry. All too often, they return home HIV-infected and pass the virus to their wives, who then transmit the disease to their infant children.

While most African governments failed to confront the threat of HIV/AIDS early-on, many leaders are now showing strong political commitment to stopping the devastation HIV/AIDS has brought to the region. Several initiatives are underway to stem the epidemic; UNAIDS reports that 40 countries in sub-Saharan Africa have completed national HIV/AIDS strategic plans. Uganda has shown that a severe epidemic can be brought under control with a strong national AIDS program. A decline in HIV prevalence has also been recorded among young pregnant women in South Africa and Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, suggesting that prevention efforts are having some success.


___________________________________________
More information on HIV/AIDS in Africa is also available from the following sources. See links in the sidebar.


International Partnership Against AIDS in Africa

HIV InSite

CNN Special on AIDS: Africa in Peril

"Crimes Against Humanity," Time Magazine

"AIDS: The Agony of Africa," Mark Schoofs series, Village Voice

"Death Watch: AIDS, Drugs and Africa," Washington Post