The Tragedy of AIDS

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by cheesypoptart, Aug 30, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Now, I haven't posted on ARRSE in months. I haven't felt the need to express myself on any issue - until five minutes ago when I read this:

    US 'harming' Uganda's Aids

    And of course I'm initially enraged because Pat Robertson/the White House (et. al.) is now not only pissing off Venezuela, spreading Christian fundamentalism, etc., but also co-responsible for increasing the HIV infection rates in Uganda.

    Towards the end of the article something makes me suddenly go STOP: "condoms [remain] a vital part of the country's Abstinence, Be faithful and Condoms (ABC) strategy."

    Be faithful?

    Ok, first of all, a minority of people get AIDS through rape (and blood transfusions, etc. at an even smaller rate), but this Uganda we're speaking about, not some war-torn country where gangs of soldiers gang rape their way through villages - so rape levels will be fairly normal.

    Which leaves me with...oh yeah, the reason that so many HIV infections occur in Uganda is not because the evil USA is undermining everything with its evil, perfidious, zee instead of zed blah blah's because those guys in Uganda are horny little bastards that like to fcuk like rabbits and don't give a damn about even the most basic tenets of monogamy.

    WHY can't people call a spade a spade anymore? Or a shovel a shovel? Or say that 'your own fault' means 'your own fault'?
    Why does it have to be our fault that despite massive efforts to educate these guys, they still keep shagging like mink (just like we have no sympathy for horny students in London that end up with five separate types of genital warts)?

    Could it be that these guys are simply not like us? Because they have a completely different way of looking at sexuality and monogamy? Haven't civilisations died out for similar reasons when they were too stupid to change their ways? Shouldn't we let them take responsibility for their own actions, i.e. all die horrible deaths for being stupid idiots?
    Why should this be our fault? Isn't there a cut off point where we go "That's all we can do gentlemen; we're going to keep doing what we're doing and escalate our involvement no further"?

    Or do I go too far because I have the flu and it's late and I can't sleep and I'm projecting my frustration onto those poor little people that really do need Bob Geldof's messianic help? Discuss...
  2. I help raise money for HIV orphans and so know a leading specalist on the subject.
    It may be strange for some folks to understand her attitudes to HIV and men Shagging around.
    The doc never passes comment on blokes haveing their 'enders' away from home. She accepts that it will happen can't change human nature.
    But No Condom and whoow she is up and running. One dip is enough as she puts it.
    Intresting to go out on a visit around the outlieing villages. Grandparents and children, parents dead long gone, usually left a brick built house to be remembered by.
  3. What no BBC mention of the catholic church's role in the spread of aids? :twisted:

    The NGO's and other agencies do not give out moral education, the only education they give is 'wear a condom or you will get Aids or some other STD'. No education is given on the joys of 'monogmy, the only people who say don't screw around are the churches.

    I would say the out look is pretty similar.
  4. Spot on cheesy!

    I had a mate who did a gap year working with aids victims in africa and she initially thought it was because of poor education and the like, but her eyes were opened! She is now convinced that the main cause of th espread of the virus is because of rampant promiscuity in the african population. They can't keep their cock in their pants, and dont even think about condoms. they would rather sell them as jewelry at the local market! 8O

    They really need to concentrate on reducing the promiscuity of the population, backed up by educational programmes on contraceptives that work
  5. jonwilly,

    I admire you for putting an effort into helping those orphans. Kids are always the losers in these situations, especially if they're born with a death sentence.

    My wife and I are seriously considering changing careers to study medicine together. It's amazing how much suffering there is, and how little one can do without the proper education - both here and over there.

    It just riles me when idiots like the Beeb, Fox News etc. turn their own opinions into gospel. Especially because their opinions are sprouted from the good ole' college days when they sat in their dorms smoking weed, telling each other how they knew 'how the world works'. Sometimes I think post-Vietnam journalists never escape this world view - one based on the desire to see the world as one wants it to be, not how it really is.

    Everyone's either a victim or a perpetrator these days, and then the Beeb makes sarastic comments about Dubya seeing everything black and white...

    What's this rant to do with AIDS and Africa? I think the way we treat Africans is with the utmost disrespect. Whether it's the Beeb or the Sun, to them Africans still a bunch of 'fuzzy wuzzies': evil, murdering false asylum seekers (Mirror) / poor little baby people who can't help themselves (Guardian) when they live in the UK, and for some reason always the latter when they're in Africa.
    Everything's always a tragedy, a perfidy, a story. Until we treat them like real people, we'll never get anything improved and keep throwing money at those poor little corrupt local politicians because 'oh, leave him be, he's too primitive to know any better'.

    End rant
  6. How do you link your paragraph above with this article on the BBC's website? I'm not denying what you describe in your paragraph does happen.

    But the secretary-general's special envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa (so he's a bit of an expert in the area) has said that the AIDS programme in Uganda is in danger of reversing its gains (HIV rates falling from 30% to 6%) and he feels the reason its in danger of reversing its gains is because Washington wants greater empahsis on abstinence over condoms. I've no idea if the chap is right or not (although it does sound plausible to me anyway) but it is a good news story that seems to have been well reported????

  7. Civilisations rise and fall. Africa is fcuked, so why do we waste so much time and effort on it? As Cheezy stated, we treat Africans with contempt. Why not leave them to their own devices for a hundred years or so? Either they will all die (as at least 30% of the continent has AIDS already), or they will grow up and stop bringing in dictators and other muppets. So several million will die. So what? We have sat and watched 3 million die in the war in Central Africa, just under a million in Rwanda and now Sudan and Zimbabwe are having a go.

    I strongly oppose asylum seekers from these places. These people are normally the youngest and fittest adults from the population. If they leave the country that they fled will never recover (look at BiH). While our economy does benefit from migrants, it is at the cost of reducing development in the 3rd world at a critical time.
  8. Oh, it's a complete rant, Tricam. Nothing specific in the article set me off, probably just that it was a headline and just another in a long series of "America fcuks the world" articles that seem to constantly grace the Beeb's headlines. I just believe the media should relax and report/prioritise news in a different manner. Especially on the Beeb, I constantly get fed these similar articles to the point that I just want to scream at them "Ok, I get the point! You think us plebs should be /against the war/against America/concerned about global warming/worrying about Zimbabwe", etc.

    Thing is, I agree with the Beeb on most subjects. But I don't think they should ram certain stories down our throat just because they are important to them. Perceived journalistic activism turns people off the news, and ultimately makes them less broadly informed.

    Similarly, if you watched Fox News right now, you'd probably see something about the Natalee Holloway case in Aruba, which they are absolutely flogging to death (Gretta van Susteren is also damn ugly). Same thing. Fox News wants young, blonde, white girls for ratings and because that's important to them, it gets shoved down our throats. Day after day after day. How is that different from totalitarian government channels that force us to listen to the same message over and over?

    Sometimes the media thinks because stuff interests them, it must interest us plebs. Look at the constant reporting of Cindy Sheehan.
    I live in the United States, in liberal Massachusetts. I'm certainly not conservative, and many people I talk to are liberals. Everyone talks about the war, nobody talks about Cindy Sheehan. My wife's family is from the Mid-West. Nobody talks about the war there, and nobody talks about Cindy Sheehan.
    Yet the Beeb would let us believe that this woman is the new Che Guevara (and in the way she's lionised for no reason, she is). Supposedly there's a national debate about Cindy Sheehan.
    There isn't. I've phoned, talked and emailed across the country, to people of many ages groups, levels of education and political persuasions (apparently, despite what the media says, there are more than two political outlooks in this country).

    The consistent picture I get is, 'this only interests an over-the-top minority who think they represent the country and want to dominate the headlines with their self-righteousness' (sounds like Christian fundamentalists to me too).
    And the media gladly gives them that attention, just like they give the attention whore that is the BTK killer exactly what he craves: publicity.

    So what's my point? Too much irrelevant B.S. rubbish is being thrown at us in the news. Why is AIDS a constant headline, but not the pervasive corruption in Africa? Conversely, why is Natalee Holloway (sorry 'Honor Student Natalee Holloway' as they always say) in the headlines, but not the tons of black girls that are missing let alone the black HIV-infected kids that are being subjected to involuntary medical trials in New York City?

    Why are irrelevant things hogging the headlines (human interest in particular), but proper journalism has to rely on getting the occasional story that never gets followed up (Panorama)?

    Oh wait, I forgot, because that's apparently what the plebeian masses crave.

    End rant

    - to which I might add that my rant quality have rapidly gone downhill.
  9. That b****** Mugabe has been repossessing white farmers' estates when all he has to do is look North and there's all that property lying empty. Problem solved!
  10. My Dr assures me if you get HIV infected babies on to antiretroviral drugs immediately they are born, most will become clear in a few years time.
    Modern retrviral drugs mean over 90% of folk can now be kept alive. Treatment not cured, a good move by the drug companies.
  11. My Dr assures me if you get HIV infected babies on to antiretroviral drugs immediately they are born, most will become clear in a few years time.
    Modern retrviral drugs mean over 90% of folk can now be kept alive. Treatment not cured, a good move by the drug companies.