When Premier William Lai (賴清德) on Friday last week received the winners of this year’s Medical Contribution Awards, he gave a rare public expression of his opinion of the HIV/AIDS issue, saying: “The primary source of HIV/AIDS infection today is homosexual males engaging in sexual activity.”
However, he only made this fragmentary statement without offering any proposals for prevention policies.
This kind of comment does nothing to help prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS and has strengthened the intensity of attacks on people with the disease and on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) communities.
The Centers for Disease Control had previously changed the risk factor for HIV/AIDS infection from “homosexuality and bisexuality” to “sexual contact between men,” and then to “unsafe sexual contact between men.”
By doing so, it has focused prevention of the disease on unsafe sex rather than a specific group of people.
Government data shows that a relatively high percentage of people with HIV/AIDS in Taiwan are men who engage in unsafe sex with other men. This is simply the situation, not the cause of it.
Lai failed to mention the factors behind this situation, which is likely to further deepen preconceived ideas and stigmatization. It is not beneficial to normalizing how society views HIV/AIDS and its prevention.
Although Taiwanese LGBT people live in a relatively friendly and open environment for Asia, misunderstandings within society have continued, and viciously discriminatory remarks can often be heard in the media. People are still writing about how young LGBT people are being bullied at schools and driven to suicide.
Meanwhile, education about safe sex between same-sex partners is still absent from schools and it is difficult for LGBT people to gain the support and blessings of their families. All of these social factors could increase gay men’s risk of exposure to HIV/AIDS.
Education and evidence-based policies are the best way to improve these social factors and the effectiveness of HIV/AIDS prevention work.
This includes implementing gender equality education to boost public understanding and acceptance of gay people, and promoting correct and diverse sex education, such as basic knowledge about the body, communication and negotiation, and safe-sex methods for different types of relationships.
It also includes investing sufficient resources in HIV/AIDS education and prevention, and in policies to destigmatize it and lower the rejection and fear people with the disease face.
The nation can also push for prevention strategies that have been proven to be effective internationally, such as pre-exposure prophylaxis.
Government agencies and civic groups are working hard to destigmatize HIV/AIDS, but Lai’s statement is likely to undo all of their efforts.
During his term as Tainan mayor, his deputy, Yen Chun-tso (顏純左), insisted on implementing a more advanced harm reduction program that has achieved good results in other nations.
We would like to ask Lai three questions:
What is the Cabinet’s concrete policy for addressing the HIV/AIDS epidemic?
How is the Cabinet going to eliminate stigmatization of and discrimination against LGBT people in Taiwan?
How is the Cabinet going to eliminate stigmatization of and discrimination against people with HIV/AIDS, so it can be treated as an ordinary disease?
Sean Du is director of policy advocacy at the Taiwan Tongzhi Hotline Association. Kao Chih-lung is a board member of the association.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS