The Age of AIDS
June 2, 2006 6:08 AM   Subscribe

The Age of AIDS. One of FRONTLINE's most ambitious (and I think very best) web sites. You'll find interactive maps concerning AIDS global scope, information to help explain the science of the virus, an interactive timeline, and interviews with people at the front of fighting the epidemic.

The show will be available at 5 PM (Eastern US) today in it's entirety on the site (except for folks in the UK and Ireland, who unfortunately will have to wait until it airs in their countries.)
posted by Mayor Curley (24 comments total)
 
Thanks, I can just barely get a very snowy picture from PBS which cuts in and out and I've been seeing this on there the past few days as I flip past and it's been making me more than usually bummed about my lack of reception.
posted by OmieWise at 6:27 AM on June 2, 2006


It's an excellent report, and as someone who was 10 in 1980 it revealed a lot about the initial stages of the epidemic I wasn't aware of. It also pulled no punches in detailing the tragic ways politics hindered research efforts, both in the US and abroad.

It did raise a question for me, which I hope doesn't come across as insensitive. When it was clear to the gay community, particularly in NY and SF, that AIDS was transmitted via sexual contact, and when people saw their friends and loved ones dying in droves, was there a conscious effort to encourage people to stop having unprotected sex? Or was there as much denial about the nature of the disease in the gay community as there was in the rest of the world? The Frontline story showed a lot of footage of gay activists angry (and rightfully so) about the lack of attention being paid to the disease, but didn't show much about what they were doing within the community to stop the dying.
posted by schoolgirl report at 6:42 AM on June 2, 2006


Great post, I had no idea that South Africa has an HIV+ muppet on Sesame Street!

(Seriously. This is awesome. Not AIDS. The post.)
posted by grapefruitmoon at 7:16 AM on June 2, 2006


(I should point out that I am a developer for the FRONTLINE site, but I checked with mathowie and he felt that it was fine given the precedent of Frontline FPP's and the fact that the FL site is a hell of a lot more than just me.)
posted by Mayor Curley at 7:23 AM on June 2, 2006


schoolgirl report: Yes, there was a tremendous effort during the '80s (with pathetically little government support, I might add), and it was quite successful. Unfortunately, the great strides that have been made in treating AIDS and the consequent phenomenon of "living with AIDS" (as opposed to the previously assumed death sentence) have meant that the effort has slacked off, and younger generations of gay men seem to have less concern about prevention.

Great post -- thanks, Mayor!
posted by languagehat at 7:40 AM on June 2, 2006


I saw the program the other day - it's powerful, compelling and well researched journalism. Which, of course, is always the case with Frontline.

The segments focusing on Mbecki's egregious denial in South Africa and Bono's efforts with Jesse Helms and Bush were particularly illuminating. The latter had me reconsidering many of my attitudes about the christian right and the conservative movement in general.

Until they get to the part about not promoting or providing resources for condoms and other contraceptives. At that, it was all I could do to keep from crying.

MC: Frontline and the Frontline site (where one can watch all of the programs free of charge) offer an extraordinary public service. Many thanks to you and the rest of the organization that make it possible!
posted by aladfar at 8:38 AM on June 2, 2006


It's an excellent report.

Yes, unfortunately, there will be a multitude of people who will fail to look into it. The AIDS epidemic is one of the defining phenomena of the late 20th and 21st Century. The failure of contemporary society to cope with it, attempting to sweep it under a rug, will surly be catastrophic.
posted by j-urb at 8:44 AM on June 2, 2006


schoolgirl report, I was wondering the same thing while watching part 1 last night, but until they discovered it was a virus, how could anyone know condoms would make a difference? (Not a rhetorical question, I would like to know the answer)
posted by yerfatma at 9:48 AM on June 2, 2006


I was wondering the same thing while watching part 1 last night, but until they discovered it was a virus, how could anyone know condoms would make a difference?

I was shocked at how long it took to know it was a virus that was causing the illnesses.
posted by Mayor Curley at 10:31 AM on June 2, 2006


I haven't seen the report, but the response in the gay community was exemplary. Even in the face of official dismissals, the organization and activism focussed on making people safe saved many many lives. The problem for the community was that the natural history of the disease is such that people can have it for a very long time without knowing it, and so the damage had largely been done (in other words the disease had already infected a tremendous number of people) by the time people really began to understand what was going on.

Ironically, the push for gay marriage, which is hard not to support as a human right, is also a pretty conservative force. The main argument is that gay people want the same things as heterosexual people (as communities), that is, monogamy and ltrs. It's hard to also sustain a public conversation about promiscuous or anonymous sex when the stated political goal is gay marriage. In other words, making gay marriage the normative political goal marginalizes the really sexy parts of the community, leading to a stifling of the very openness which made the positive response to HIV/Aids possible. I think this needs to be factored in along with the fatal/chronic distinction that lh points to when we talk about the troubles with keeping the pressure on to control the spread of HIV. (Michael Warner has written well about this in The Trouble with Normal.)
posted by OmieWise at 10:37 AM on June 2, 2006


I saw it too. Very well done.
posted by bardic at 10:46 AM on June 2, 2006


schoolgirl report/yerfatma, I think a lot of the gay community's response, particularly in the very early years of the disease, had to do with the social construction of AIDS. Lesbian and Gay activists had just spent a decade working fiercely to have homosexuality declassified as a psychological disorder and were, for pretty much the first time in American history, enjoying some political success. There was a sense of pride and community that was still fairly new and fragile, so when AIDS appeared, it was regarded by many as a direct affront (a conspiracy, even) to the gay lifestyle. For many, sexual expression, was an integral part of their self-identification as gay men. AIDS appears and suddenly the dominant public discourse is that it only affects gay men, in the early scientific literature it was even called Gay-Related Immune Deficiency (GRID). Worse still, it was considered by a lot of people to be God's punishment for homosexuality/sodomy/drug users/etc. At that time, condom use among gay men was pretty low because most of the STDs one could get were easily treated with antibiotics. Education about their use as a preventative for AIDS was practically nil because for at least the first couple of years, scientists were still divided on how the disease was spread.

This all represents the very early years of the epidemic, however. As soon as the causal link was established between sex and transmission, safer sex advocacy boomed in the gay community. In the years (yes, years because programs that spread the word were most often received little or no government support) that it took to spread the message, however, thousands more became infected. Because HIV can be dormant for years before an infected person gets sick, many people did not even know that they were infected and passed the disease on; this was exacerbated by the fact that it was about five years into the epidemic before a reliable test for the disease came into common use.

So, the long and short is that the gay community's response was tremendous, both in regard to prevention education and later (as The Age of AIDS shows) treatment activism, but they were at battle not only with the disease but with a conflicted scientific body and a massive societal discourse that many viewed as trying to destroy gay self expression. [on preview, what OmieWise said - "exemplary"]
posted by carlitos at 10:47 AM on June 2, 2006


The show will be available at 5 PM (Eastern US) today in it's entirety on the site (except for folks in the UK and Ireland, who unfortunately will have to wait until it airs in their countries.)

Mayor Curley, the wording above indicates that the show will be available for viewing by people in the US and every other internet connected country *except* the UK and Ireland. Is this the case?
posted by pierrepressure at 11:15 AM on June 2, 2006


Mayor Curley, the wording above indicates that the show will be available for viewing by people in the US and every other internet connected country *except* the UK and Ireland. Is this the case?

To the best of my knowledge, yes. This due to an agreement with a broadcaster in those countries, where the program is going to air and has not yet.

Additionally, there will be an extra large version of the viewable show launched next week. It will have optional subtitles if all goes according to plan and will be available in Windows Media and Quicktime.
posted by Mayor Curley at 11:31 AM on June 2, 2006


That was the most incredibly depressing documentary I ever watched. I had no idea Reagan was such an asshole. I mean I knew he was bad but I didn't realize it went beyond "Reagan Sucks!" to completely turning a blind eye to gays and Haitians and then doing everything wrong he could have. The worst part was seeing the one guy at the pharmacy paying in cash for the incredibly expensive treatment and then going to his very spartan, lonely apartment.

I remember when I worked at a pharmacy for a few weeks and a few elderly came in and paid in cash for $500+ treatment for whatever advanced disease they had. At least then I kept telling myself they lived a long life and should at least be grateful for that. It's hard to see the most destitute social pariahs, barely in their 20s wasting away.
posted by geoff. at 11:37 AM on June 2, 2006


Awesome, thanks.
posted by pierrepressure at 11:38 AM on June 2, 2006


Future Chief Justice John Roberts advised Reagan regarding the transmission of AIDS: "I would not like to see the president reassure the public on this matter only to find out later that he was wrong. We should assume that AIDS can be transmitted until it's demonstrated that it cannot be."

This despite repeated assurances from scientists that AIDS is not casually transmitted.

As usual, political science trumps natural science.
posted by potsmokinghippieoverlord at 11:48 AM on June 2, 2006


Or was there as much denial about the nature of the disease in the gay community as there was in the rest of the world?

Depends on perspective. Randy Shilts, in his book And the Band Played On..., certainly thought so. Because this was viewed, in the Reagan climate, as ammunition for homophobes, Shilts was ostracized in a number of quarters while being hailed in others. But the issues were complicated, and at the very least Shilts -- surely out of anger -- took extreme positions.

Part of the problem, looking back, is that there were very few places with open gay "communities" in the 1980s. San Francisco, yes, and a few major cities or university towns. Many other places, there wasn't a critical mass of uncloseted gays to have the necessary impact. In my experience (from the queer-friendly-straight perspective) this has changed dramatically in the last 20 years. I think this is the missing piece that explains why there was both an aggressive, focused safe-sex education movement, and an enormous untapped market, if you will, of closeted gays who would not, could not, participate in the conversation. Even today, in rural America, AIDS is a closely guarded secret for many.

Thus, where the community was out and organized, it was successful, but in the beginning that represented -- probably -- a distinct minority of gays in America. The flip side, of course, is that the AIDS crisis forced many smaller communities to grapple with the disease and, in the process, the questions of being out and politically active. Gay publications like The Advocate spent much of the 1980s debating the "responsibility" of being out vs. self-interest in remaining closeted. Today, that argument has clearly been won.

By the way, there's a great quiz on global AIDS at Democracy Arsenal from Heather Hurlburt.
posted by dhartung at 11:54 AM on June 2, 2006


The whole program is available online? That's so cool. I meant to see this and forgot about it. Thanks!
posted by needs more cowbell at 12:16 PM on June 2, 2006


I watched it both nights, part A and B. In my opinion that leader of South Africa, ..the successor to Mandela, ..he's responsible for thousands and thousands of deaths. A very misguided, and close-minded man.
posted by thisisdrew at 1:01 PM on June 2, 2006


thanks, Mayor...

it's so weird to think that people have no clue just how absent (at best) Reagan was back then on this, especially when you see all the current administration's stuff on Bird Flu. And so many still don't know that we're not allowed to give blood even today (a lasting legacy of that era).

there's always been conflict between those for free expression of sexuality in all forms (whether dangerous or not) and those who want to protect everyone. It got way more complicated when the cocktails were developed and people started to see it as a managable illness and not a death sentence.

I just want a cure or vaccine, which looks like will never happen in my lifetime.
posted by amberglow at 2:01 PM on June 2, 2006


it was great TV. it should be madatory viewing. my take away message was that religious forces got us in the awful mess by not dealing with the uncomfortable issues head on. while there is lots of blame to go around, religion always seems to emerge as the biggest anti-progress.
posted by brandz at 10:02 AM on June 3, 2006






« Older Two Fools Who Need Pity   |   A guide to Twin Peaks Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments