Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

rarehistoricalphotos.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

#11

Post by DaveExeter »

6sG2C54md377Rxi wrote: post #7
ceejayoz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 1950s through 1970s were the golden ages of antibiotics. New ones discovered all the time, and minimal resistance. Stuff like syphilis was readily curable.

So Hep B, herpes, HPV and anything else that is viral and not readily cured by a course of antibiotics is simply not a concern? I’m not a doctor, gay man, or a sexually active person, but it doesn’t take much research to figure out that unprotected sex with random people will cause health problems that cannot be waved off with a simple pill.

Believe it or not, sexually transmitted diseases were not much of a concern from the sexual revolution of the 1960s until the arrival of herpes, or at least the re-branding of herpes as a very bad thing. [1]

So everyone was afraid of the herps, an untreatable condition.

Then AIDS came along!

[1] https://slate.com/technology/2019/12/genital-herpes-stigma-h...

Re: A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

#12

Post by 6sG2C54md377Rxi »

pstuart wrote: post #6
6sG2C54md377Rxi wrote: post #3

I don’t understand. > The biggest opponents of doing anything about AIDS, anything at all, were conservatives trumpeting family values. And then later in the article: > The notion of “pregnancy is the only drawback to sex” ended up setting the groundwork for HIV spread amongst the gay community, as there was no need for the use of condoms. Diseases which can be sexually transmitted among humans have existed a lot lon…

Were you around when this came about? There was a lot of fear and uncertainty. There was also a strong undercurrent of hate, and that these gay men deserve to die for being "bad". There still is a lot of hate (hat tip to Mitch Hedberg), but it was worse back then. I lost several friends to this disease -- it was, and remains, heartbreaking.

I’m not questioning the reality of AIDS or its impact. I’m trying to understand the climate and people’s outlook of the time.

You’re right: I wasn’t around during that era. I was born in ‘86 in a faraway society that did not see these issues the same way. However, I was taught from a young age that sexual promiscuity lacking precautions was a sure pathway to disease and possibly early death.

Was this not common knowledge in the US? Were gay men fundamentally more reckless than a baseline American?

Re: A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

#13

Post by ceejayoz »

6sG2C54md377Rxi wrote: post #7
ceejayoz wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 1950s through 1970s were the golden ages of antibiotics. New ones discovered all the time, and minimal resistance. Stuff like syphilis was readily curable.

So Hep B, herpes, HPV and anything else that is viral and not readily cured by a course of antibiotics is simply not a concern? I’m not a doctor, gay man, or a sexually active person, but it doesn’t take much research to figure out that unprotected sex with random people will cause health problems that cannot be waved off with a simple pill.

> So Hep B, herpes, HPV and anything else that is viral and not readily cured by a course of antibiotics is simply not a concern?

For the most part, correct. Herpes and HPV hit basically everyone; chances are you've had one or both. Hep B is less prevalent, but still quite widespread (Wiki says 1/3 of people will get it eventually), and in most cases has minimal symptoms.

They're nothing like HIV.

Re: A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

#14

Post by m0llusk »

6sG2C54md377Rxi wrote: post #3

I don’t understand. > The biggest opponents of doing anything about AIDS, anything at all, were conservatives trumpeting family values. And then later in the article: > The notion of “pregnancy is the only drawback to sex” ended up setting the groundwork for HIV spread amongst the gay community, as there was no need for the use of condoms. Diseases which can be sexually transmitted among humans have existed a lot lon…

The culture told gay men that they were impossible and sex was bad. Gay men discovered on their own that they actually were possible and did in fact exist and when they had sex it was good. So there was a cultural idea that sex being dangerous was created by the church and other large social structures in order to control people. If you were straight and wanted a family, as is the case with many, then this might not be such a big deal.

This is similar to modern conflicts such as the projection that drug users or gun owners are inherently malicious.

Re: A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

#15

Post by ceejayoz »

6sG2C54md377Rxi wrote: post #12
pstuart wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you around when this came about? There was a lot of fear and uncertainty. There was also a strong undercurrent of hate, and that these gay men deserve to die for being "bad". There still is a lot of hate (hat tip to Mitch Hedberg), but it was worse back then. I lost several friends to this disease -- it was, and remains, heartbreaking.

I’m not questioning the reality of AIDS or its impact. I’m trying to understand the climate and people’s outlook of the time. You’re right: I wasn’t around during that era. I was born in ‘86 in a faraway society that did not see these issues the same way. However, I was taught from a young age that sexual promiscuity lacking precautions was a sure pathway to disease and possibly early death. Was this not common knowl…

> However, I was taught from a young age that sexual promiscuity lacking precautions was a sure pathway to disease and possibly early death.

Sex ed changed pretty significantly in the 80s/90s, yes.

> Were gay men fundamentally more reckless than a baseline American?

The attitude of "baseline Americans" was likely fairly similar - if you catch something, you can get a shot of penicillin. The US military in WWII got pretty comfortable treating "venereal disease" after shore leave.

Re: A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

#16

Post by grandphuba »

m0llusk wrote: post #10

Perhaps the most important contrast that can be made here is between the ideas about causality. When AIDS first hit hard it was gay men in coastal cities, so people quickly became comfortable with the idea that rampant decadent buttsex was the cause and the issue and that allowed them to frame the whole mess in a more comfortable way. Later it was found that the virus had been for some time percolating in the Caribbe…

It also doesn't help that there are entities out there will actively make it hard to do proper investigations.

Re: A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

#17

Post by DaveExeter »

6sG2C54md377Rxi wrote: post #12
pstuart wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you around when this came about? There was a lot of fear and uncertainty. There was also a strong undercurrent of hate, and that these gay men deserve to die for being "bad". There still is a lot of hate (hat tip to Mitch Hedberg), but it was worse back then. I lost several friends to this disease -- it was, and remains, heartbreaking.

I’m not questioning the reality of AIDS or its impact. I’m trying to understand the climate and people’s outlook of the time. You’re right: I wasn’t around during that era. I was born in ‘86 in a faraway society that did not see these issues the same way. However, I was taught from a young age that sexual promiscuity lacking precautions was a sure pathway to disease and possibly early death. Was this not common knowl…

>However, I was taught from a young age that sexual promiscuity lacking precautions was a sure pathway to disease and possibly early death

Yes, because you grew up post-AIDs. Pre-AIDs, it was different.

If you grew up before AIDs, you would have been taught the greatest danger of promiscuous sex was unwanted pregnancy.

Re: A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

#18

Post by stan_rogers »

6sG2C54md377Rxi wrote: post #12
pstuart wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you around when this came about? There was a lot of fear and uncertainty. There was also a strong undercurrent of hate, and that these gay men deserve to die for being "bad". There still is a lot of hate (hat tip to Mitch Hedberg), but it was worse back then. I lost several friends to this disease -- it was, and remains, heartbreaking.

I’m not questioning the reality of AIDS or its impact. I’m trying to understand the climate and people’s outlook of the time. You’re right: I wasn’t around during that era. I was born in ‘86 in a faraway society that did not see these issues the same way. However, I was taught from a young age that sexual promiscuity lacking precautions was a sure pathway to disease and possibly early death. Was this not common knowl…

Actually getting condoms used to be a highly stigmatized pain in the ass back in the "caveman" days in large swaths of the world (especially in large swaths of the US). You came up in a very different environment.

Re: A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

#19

Post by anandrew »

m0llusk wrote: post #10

Perhaps the most important contrast that can be made here is between the ideas about causality. When AIDS first hit hard it was gay men in coastal cities, so people quickly became comfortable with the idea that rampant decadent buttsex was the cause and the issue and that allowed them to frame the whole mess in a more comfortable way. Later it was found that the virus had been for some time percolating in the Caribbe…

You should distinguish between "primary cause" and "primary spreaders" ("primary" because there is rarely only one). Does the virus starting in the wilds of Africa have any bearing on whether promiscuous sex helps spread it?

Re: A father comforts his son on deathbed. The photo that changed the face of AIDS

#20

Post by pstuart »

6sG2C54md377Rxi wrote: post #12
pstuart wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you around when this came about? There was a lot of fear and uncertainty. There was also a strong undercurrent of hate, and that these gay men deserve to die for being "bad". There still is a lot of hate (hat tip to Mitch Hedberg), but it was worse back then. I lost several friends to this disease -- it was, and remains, heartbreaking.

I’m not questioning the reality of AIDS or its impact. I’m trying to understand the climate and people’s outlook of the time. You’re right: I wasn’t around during that era. I was born in ‘86 in a faraway society that did not see these issues the same way. However, I was taught from a young age that sexual promiscuity lacking precautions was a sure pathway to disease and possibly early death. Was this not common knowl…

Other commenters are appropriately addressing the nature of other STDs and attitudes at the time.

Yes, they were more reckless because until then they pretty much could be (caveats for the risks already known, but those were equal opportunity offenders).

Your lessons on the dangers were based on those learned at this time. When it hit there was no understanding and it was frightening for all.

Post reply on HN