QUICK FACTS - US
• In 2004, HIV infection was the leading cause of death for black women aged 25-34 years
• In 2004, HIV infection was the 5th leading cause of death for all women aged 35-44 years
• High-risk heterosexual contact is the source of 80% of newly diagnosed infections
• Women are slightly less likely than men to receive a prescription for the most effective treatments for HIV infection
• About 26% of new HIV diagnoses are female
• In 1992, women made up only 14% of people living with AIDS, but by 2005, this proportion was 23%
• African American and Hispanic women together represent 24% of US women, but account for 82% of total AIDS diagnoses for women
RISK FACTORS FOR WOMEN
• Younger age: HIV/AIDS diagnoses highest for women aged 15-39
• Lack of recognition of partner’s risk factors: In one study, 34% of black men who had sex with men reported to also have sex with women, but only 6% of black women knew about their partners’ bisexual activity
• Relationship dynamics: Women may not insist on using a condom for fear of physical abuse
• Biological vulnerability and STDs – Women are significantly more likely to contract HIV infection during vaginal intercourse and STDs increases the chance of transmitting or acquiring HIV
• Socioeconomic Issues: Women in poverty are more likely to abuse substances, lack access to high-quality healthcare, exchange sex for money, and have a higher number of sexual partners
QUICK FACTS - GLOBAL
• HIV is the leading cause of death and disease among women of reproductive age worldwide
• Women make up 50% of global epidemic
• 70% of women experience violence in their lifetime
• The risk of HIV among women who have experienced violence may be up to three times higher than among those who have not
• Women, fearing or experiencing violence are less likely to negotiate for safe sex, go for HIV testing, share their status, or seek treatment
• Forced sex increases risk of HIV transmission due to lacerations
• In some countries, it is common for men to have more than one sexual partner and to maintain sexual relations with much younger women, which can contribute to an infection rate for young women that is 3 times higher than young men
PERSONAL STORIES
Visit http://www.avert.org/living-with-hiv.htm to read about personal stories of individuals who've experienced gender violence in their lives
RAPE CRISIS IN SOUTH AFRICA: QUICK FACTS
• In South Africa, a woman is raped every minute
• South Africa has the world’s largest number of people living with HIV: 5.5 million out of a population of about 48 million
• In South Africa, there are estimated to be 1.7 million rapes each year, but only 54,000 rape survivors lay charges
• 75% of rape in South Africa is gang rape
• 50% of all court cases in South Africa are for rape
• The average age of children raped in South Africa is 3, 41-90% of rape is against children under 12, depending on the region
• 26% of doctors don’t think rape is a serious medical problem
• 40% of those raped are at risk of becoming HIV-positive
• Girls in South Africa are 6 times more likely to have HIV than boys
WHY?
• 1/4 of men admit to having raped someone
• 1/2 of these men admit to having raped more than once
• 62% of boys believe rape is not violence
• 1/3 of boys believe girls enjoy rape
• 75% of rape is gang rape – sometimes considered male bonding
• Some people believe sex with a virgin cures HIV
• Many people believe that sex with a child is safe
*Disclaimer: These statistics are not intended to present men as evil perpetrators of this crime. Rather, they illuminate how men have been socialized to believe that rape is acceptable.
WHAT IS BEING DONE?
• Sonnet Ehlers, a South African woman invented “Rape-aXe,” an anti-rape condom that hooks onto a man’s penis during penetration
• Media campaigns
• Public education aimed at men about rape and violence
• Public education about HIV/AIDS
• Providing HIV drugs to victims immediately after rape, in case of exposure
• NGOs working to implement policies related to sexual offences
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Friday, December 2, 2011
Language Policing
It’s very easy and common for people to be really savvy in the language they use to avoid being ableist and so on, and yet have rotten attitudes and actions. How much are we letting language policing distract us from getting to the core of the issues raised?
I’m starting to get a little wary of language policing. Mainly because it seems a little too easy.
Instead of engaging with points of view that are challenging to yours (or just even working from a very different perspective), instead of looking within yourself to see how you’re perpetuating and practicing discrimination and harm, all you have to do is pick out a word and go “Ableist! Classist! XYZist!” and dismiss the other person altogether, self-satisfied that we’re done our Good Activist Deed Of The Day and so no one can call us out on our rubbish.
Prettying up the surface instead of dealing with the darker depths. Talking the talk but not walking the walk. Not willing to take what you dish out. Nitpicking on the small stuff because it saves us from having to tackle the hairier things.
I feel like we’re in some sort of weird semi-academic-language bubble in some internet communities, particularly Tumblr where I blog, patting ourselves on the back for not using ableist words or whatever, without actually thinking of how it works elsewhere in the world.
Honestly, outside of Tumblr, who else is going to look at words like “homophobia” and go “Oh no! That’s ableist towards people with phobias!”? Especially when the people who have a right to raise that concern haven’t brought it up in offline circles until now?
Will anyone else be able to understand why certain words are X-ist if you explain – or will they come back and say that just because they use supposedly X terms doesn’t mean they are that discriminatory in their actions?
It’s very easy (and common) for people to be really savvy in the language and yet have rotten attitudes and actions.
And speaking of savviness: I feel that language policing puts even more pressure on people whose language (mainly English) skills are already under scrutiny for not being perfect – people for whom English isn’t a first language, who learnt it in a non-English-centric country, who grew up trying to translate difficult nuances between languages and found ways that were “good enough” early on.
There’s already enough prejudice being doled out for not speaking “proper English” (as if there’s such a thing) and for not typing full sentences or using your/you’re correctly as it is.
Do we really want to privilege conversations like these towards people who have really high English language skills, whatever their perspective?
Do we really want to alienate people with important and useful perspectives because they’ve learnt to use the word “crazy” for things that don’t make sense, or can’t get people’s pronouns right because their native language only has one pronoun for any gender, or has found the term “homophobia” useful while still dealing with a debilitating phobia of spiders but doesn’t see one degrading the other?
As it is we can’t even seem to make up our minds between being descriptive and being prescriptive. “They” as a singular pronoun is OK, but you can’t use “-phobia” anymore? You shouldn’t look down at someone’s typing skills, but there’s a huge difference between “trans man” and “transman”?
I saw this happen with blogger BFP. She writes something important about having to deal with paperwork and insurance and finding it difficult due to her various health conditions, and the first responses are “This term is ableist” – when it turns out that they actually are relevant to her position.
How many of us are going to know the writer’s original life story enough to be able to make that call between “They’re ableist!” and “They lived this!”?
Do we have the right to make that call?
How much are we letting language policing distract us from getting to the core of the issues raised?
What’s important here – what they’re saying or how they’re saying it?
-Tiara the Merchgirl
From The Scavenger
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)