Embedded Files
HIV and Monkeypox
HIV and Monkeypox
Jessica L.
Published on 2023.02.14
There are multiple viruses that are spreading around the LGBTQ+ community, more specifically between men who have sex with other men. Although the viruses are capable of spreading to others outside of said group, there are still a larger number of cases within the group. To gain a better understanding and reduce the threats, it is essential to learn about the viruses attacking people in the LGBTQ+ community. Here are two well-known examples:
HIV
HIV, a form of STD, has been spreading around for multiple decades now, and there is still no cure for the virus. HIV spreads through sexual contact from the anal or vaginal regions of the body ("About"). This virus is constantly spreading around the MSM community. Statistically, in 2020, there are around 57% of MSM that have HIV ("National").
This can be due to the fact that MSM are less likely to use condoms when performing intercourse. Since condoms reduce the chances of receiving HIV, these men are more likely to contract the virus (Ostergren et al.) The reasoning behind not using condoms as often as straight couples is that most men cannot get pregnant, therefore making condoms appear unnecessary without proper knowledge of HIV. Another reason why men can catch HIV more easily is because of anal sex. Since most men do not have a vagina, they have intercourse through the anal. When having anal sex, the chances of getting HIV are increased by 18 times compared to vaginal sex. This is because there are epithelial cells lining the vagina, which gives it a barrier to prevent infection from STDs or viruses, including HIV. Another reason may be because the rectal tissues, located in the anal, are weak and fragile, therefore making it easy for HIV to slip through. The rectal tissues in the anal also contain CD4 T cells, which are cells that HIV targets (Boskey). Finally, men who have sex with other men receive a lot of criticism from society. Since they are a part of the group that makes up most of the HIV cases, it is advised for them to get tested for the virus more often. However, since a lot of countries and environments do not condone same-sex intercourse among people, the stigma prevented many from getting tested and receiving treatment (Higuera).
HIV is an important virus to look for since when you leave it untreated, it can develop into AIDs, a chronic and life-threatening condition that attacks the immune system and can increase the chances of receiving other viruses and illnesses more easily ("About"). In 2020, around 599,433 gay and bisexual men are living with HIV ("National"). Although men who have sex with other men make up most of the cases of HIV, it is important to note the presence of stigma that led to this.
Monkeypox
Monkeypox, a virus transmitted from animals to humans, has been around for a while and is mostly spreading in Europe and the Americas ("Mpox"). The virus spreads through direct contact, bodily fluids, intercourse etc ("Monkeypox"). Similar to HIV, this virus has also been spreading around the LGBTQ+ community for a while.
Monkeypox may have been spread during a gay rave in Europe. This may have led to the spread to many other people in the gay, bisexual, and MSM communities, even if they never attended the rave. Since monkeypox can be spread through close contact with others, this means that monkeypox is highly likely to be spread in a situation where there is a lot of close contact between people, such as parties, raves, bars, and more (Wolfe).
Although it is true that monkeypox is spreading mostly between MSM, it is also important to note how everyone has the same chances of getting the virus, therefore making monkeypox not a disease that only men who have sex with other men can get. It is important to look out for this disease as it causes people to become extremely ill and is potentially life-threatening ("Monkeypox").
Conclusion
Overall, these are a few examples of viruses attacking people in the MSM community. Both monkeypox and the HIV virus are extremely dangerous to people, and without the necessary treatment, they can evolve into something much more threatening. There is a lot of discrimination around the LGBTQ+ community, and it can prevent people who are part of this community from getting the support and help they need to overcome these viruses. It is essential for everyone to accept the groups that are involved so that we can reduce the chances of them contracting the virus. Lastly, although these viruses can spread to other people outside of the community, it is always important to look out for warning signs so that you don’t risk catching any of these viruses in the future!
Works Cited
“About HIV/AIDS.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 30 June 2022, https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/whatishiv.html.
Boskey, Elizabeth. “Why Do Gay Men Get HIV?” Verywell Health, 14 Dec. 2022, https://www.verywellhealth.com/why-do-gay-men-have-an-increased-risk-of-hiv-3132782.
Higuera, Valencia. “Why Is the Risk of Contracting HIV Higher in Gay Men?” Healthline, Healthline Media, 28 Sept. 2021, https://www.healthline.com/health/hiv-aids/hiv-risk-in-gay-men.
“Monkeypox.” World Health Organization, World Health Organization, 19 May 2022, https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/monkeypox.
“Mpox (Monkeypox) Outbreak 2022.” World Health Organization, World Health Organization, 2022, https://www.who.int/emergencies/situations/monkeypox-oubreak-2022.
“National Gay Men's HIV/AIDS Awareness Day 2022.” AIDSVu, 3 Nov. 2022, https://aidsvu.org/national-gay-mens-hiv-aids-awareness-day-2022/.
Ostergren, Jenny E, et al. “Reasons for Non-Use of Condoms among Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Comparison of Receptive and Insertive Role in Sex and Online and Offline Meeting Venue.” Taylor & Francis, 19 Oct. 2010, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13691058.2010.520168.
Wolfe, Jonathan. “Monkeypox and the Gay Community.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 24 June 2022, https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/24/briefing/monkeypox-gay-community.html.
Amatonormativity: A Silent Struggle
Amatonormativity: A Silent Struggle
Sarah Mahmud
Published on 2024.02.02
"Nothing you can make that can't be made,
No one you can save that can't be saved.
Nothing you can do, but you can learn how to be you in time,
It's easy;
All you need is love." — "All You Need Is Love" by The Beatles, 1967
There is little coverage of the systemic and social biases that asexual and aromantic individuals face. Even within the LGBTQ+ community, many uneducated on these issues believe that these groups have historically faced little discrimination compared to that of other identities; some may even believe this makes a-spec individuals, especially those that are cisgender and/or heteroromantic, not deserving of being members of the community at all.
These assertions, however, are based on a completely false premise. While amendments to the law and societal changes have been made to include gay and trans people after years of outcry, the same cannot be said for asexuals and aromantics wishing to live their lives comfortably, and this is because of how we—as a society—have historically viewed those who are “single” or celibate. The belief that romance and marriage unequivocally make a person a “complete asset,” which Professor Elizabeth Blake termed "amatonormativity" in the 1980s, is both harmful and has present consequences that go unknown to the public eye. Our community has a responsibility to self-reflect about how this thinking affects our society in order to create a more inclusive one, which involves understanding how amatonormativity not just affects the a-spec community, but everyone.
Marginalization
Amatonormativity inherently marginalizes those who do not conform to the expected romantic relationship narrative, regardless of their sexual identity, though it leaves asexual and aromantic people especially alienated. Non-sexual romance, platonic friendships, and even familial relationships are undervalued and often viewed as inferior or secondary to that of conventional romantic partnerships. This stigma surfaces in multiple ways, and is deeply ingrained within society.
While questions such as when one will “settle down” or if one will bring a “plus one” to an event are usually asked by family members and friends in a well-meaning way, they leave those who do not wish to be in relationships feeling socially excluded and unsupported, depreciating their overall well-being and happiness as they feel they are under constant question or suspicion of their identity by others. Some might even be incorrectly perceived as attracted to the same sex only on the basis that they do not have a partner, or that they don’t have sex with their opposite sex partner. Bias is shown legally as well, with housing and child custody discrimination amongst the single, despite being otherwise capable. Even obtaining the right to a tubal ligation amongst single AFAB individuals has been a notoriously troublesome process because of amatonormativity. Many doctors insist for months upon the fact that once these people find someone they wish to settle down with, they will regret their decision to never be able to have children again; their obstacle to consenting to this surgery is a man who only exists hypothetically.
The Issue With Undermining Friendship and Nonsexual Romance
Outside of marginalizing a-spec individuals, the societal emphasis on romantic love as the highest form of relationship can overshadow the true significance of friendship and nonsexual love. What is commonly portrayed in the media as happiness only “true” love can bring – support, companionship, and a sense of belonging – is also provided by any other type of relationship, and the love shown is often on par. However, the importance of these connections, more or less, have been lost upon recent generations due to amatonormative standards.
Especially with the romanticization of living a fun and “perfect” life on apps such as TikTok and Instagram, Gen Z and many other individuals commonly find themselves looking for happiness through sexual and romantic relationships instead of through friendships. While great happiness can be found in romantic relationships, this then becomes their primary source of it, which is when issues begin to form as their support group outside of this relationship is non-existent. Many have found that when they fall ill, or wish to seek advice within their community, they do not have a proper safety net outside of their partner, which can turn into feelings of severe isolation. By devaluing platonic and non-sexual relationships, these social support networks that are desperately needed in this day and age do not become a priority to many people, when they’re beneficial relationships in their own right.
Conclusion
Amatonormativity has far-reaching consequences on the personal growth and well-being of anyone, regardless of their identity as an a-spec individual. However, a-spec individuals are affected disproportionately by amatonormativity, and to suggest that asexual or aromantic people do not face a systemic struggle is false. To recognize and celebrate non-sexual and platonic relationships the same as “conventional” relationships would create a society that is more welcoming, and result in a more nuanced understanding of human connection.
Works Cited
Bogaert, Anthony F. Understanding asexuality. Rowman & Littlefield, 2015.
Elgie, Evelyn. Being and doing: Interrogating dominant narratives of asexual kinship in an amatonormative culture. Diss. University of British Columbia, 2020.
Granger, Rilee. "Amatonormativity, Aromanticism, and What Defines a Relationship." (2020).
Omar, Bahiyah, and Wang Dequan. "Watch, share or create: The influence of personality traits and user motivation on TikTok mobile video usage." (2020): 121-137.
Exclusive Blood Policies
Exclusive Blood Policies
Sarah Mahmud
Published on 2024.08.29
It is often taken for granted just how crucial blood can be. Every day donated blood plays a pivotal role in saving lives during the treatment of serious injuries, blood disorders, and cancer, and can be the difference between life and death for many undergoing surgery. However, for decades, gay and bisexual men have faced discriminatory restrictions that have hindered their ability to contribute to this life-saving cause.
The HIV/AIDS Scare
Policies prohibiting gay and bisexual men from donating blood date back to the 1980s, when the HIV/AIDS epidemic was at its height. Notably, there were severe public health concerns following what was known as the “tainted blood scandal” during this decade, in which a great number of Canadians received blood products contaminated with HIV and hepatitis C, dying painfully as a result. Due to the remote possibility that the blood supply could at all be contaminated by the virus or by any other factors, many men were subsequently placed on a temporary blacklist or prohibited from donating blood altogether after being classified as “MSM,” or “men who have sex with men.” The driving force and basis behind this decision, however, was mostly based on misconceptions regarding the virus and its prevalence within the LGBTQ+ community.
The association of the virus with the community had been deeply entrenched into public perception at this point, and with it came fear and rapidly spread misinformation. It should be noted that the classification “MSM” was irrespective of sexual activity at all, let alone whether or not the person even identified as gay or bisexual; it was only based on sexual orientation, not activity. While the unexpected transmission of STDs was and always is a possibility, many of the men classified this way were monogamous with their partners or otherwise unlikely carriers. The lifetime ban associated with most MSM labelling also ignored the individual risk factors associated with HIV transmission, treating all gay and bisexual men as a monolithic high-risk group, and this was due to the popular belief that HIV/AIDS almost exclusively affected the gay community in North America.
Steps To Lift The Ban
In 2013, Canada took a significant step forward by replacing the lifetime ban with a five year “deferral” period for men who had sex with men, meaning it would take five years to see if one was eligible to donate blood again. In addition to acknowledging that a complete ban on "MSM" individuals was not representative of individual behaviours within the LGBTQ+ community as a whole, this revision also stressed the significance of incorporating scientific evidence into blood donation policies as opposed to enacting a ban that would solely impact one particular group.
While progress has been made, challenges persist in achieving a fully “inclusive” blood donation system. Steps have been taken to ensure that decisions are made on a more scientific basis rather than one heavily relying on considering an entire identity a risk factor, but to this day, more than ten years later, gay and bisexual men who have taken rigorous steps to ensure their own safety and the safety of others still have issues with donating blood. The new deferral period, while not arbitrary, continues to perpetuate stereotypes, and many find its length an insult. The current policy as it stands also still does not consider incredibly important factors, such as the use of safer sex practices or advancements in HIV testing technologies. Nucleic acid testing (NAT), for instance, is frequently brought up in reference to this ban as it allows for a shorter window period between checks for eligibility, reducing the need for such an unreasonably lengthy deferral period.
Conclusion
The historical restrictions across several decades on blood donation from gay and bisexual men reflect an era of misunderstanding and fear surrounding HIV/AIDS. It is clear that at the current moment, while there is always justifiable worry about the safety of our blood supply, there is little reason for our system not to shift towards inclusive, evidence-based policies that do not facilitate identity based discrimination. Progress has been made in Canada, however, more work is required to guarantee that these laws are just and fair.
Works Cited
Bayer R. Science, politics, and the end of the lifelong gay blood donor ban. Milbank Q. 2015 Jun;93(2):230-3. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12114. PMID: 26044622; PMCID: PMC4462870.
Ducas, Evangeline. "Canada's Tainted Blood Scandal: The Rise of the Precautionary Principle in Public Health Regulation." Carleton Perspectives on Public Policy 2 (2015): 19-37.
LGBTQ Rights in Canada
LGBTQ Rights in Canada
Caitlin N.
Published on 2024.08.29
1969 marks the year Canada decriminalized sodomy and reformed their indecency laws to declassify homosexuality as an indecent act, a stepping stone for the acquisition of LGBTQ rights in Canada (Rau). Since then, numerous other rights and bills have been added and amended to assist gay and transgender people in living comfortable lives free of identity-based incarceration today. With the ever-changing political landscape, it is important to learn about these rights if needed, such as defending oneself if threatened. The following article will summarize potentially unfamiliar and recent laws that have been implemented.
On January 7th, 2021, conversion therapy was officially criminalized (Treisman). The bill describes conversion therapy as any practice, treatment or service designed to change or repress a person’s sexual orientation or gender (Bill C-4). The bill prohibits any offenses entailing: causing someone to undergo conversion therapy; removing a child from Canada to undergo conversion therapy abroad; promoting or advertising; receiving any material benefit from the practice of conversion therapy (Bill C-4).
Healthcare and gender-affirming rights in Canada still have a long way to go, however, 2023 has seen some progress towards inclusion. All provinces and territories now provide coverage for genital sex reassignment surgery, although wait time, requirements, and coverage will vary per province or territory (Mertz). On September 11th, 2022, the federal government also reformed blood donation policies to no longer ban sexually active gay and bisexual men during the screening process (Tait). After this reform, regardless of sexual orientation, all who are screened will now be asked about their recent sexual behaviour (Tait).
Despite this progress, the New Brunswick government has enacted policy 713, where teachers may not use the preferred names or pronouns of students under sixteen without parental consent (Cooke). The policy has been going through adjustments because it violates aspects of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, such as section 15, which ensures all people are barred from identity-based discrimination (Cooke). This policy could be detrimental to LGBTQ youth, as it prohibits them from exploring gender identity and expression without fear of potential outings to parents.
Furthermore, the ideology behind such a policy is spreading. Ontario Premier Doug Ford believes that “It is not up to the teachers. It’s not up to the school boards to indoctrinate our children'' (Khan). Ford now wants to create similar policies to policy 713 in Ontario, putting even more queer Canadian students at risk of being out to family. It is important to understand that policy 713 treads on grounds that violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, and such policies to follow will most likely also violate Canada’s charter. Many have been deeming the policy as unconstitutional, and if students are at risk of being affected by such policies, they are encouraged to call local governments to raise their concerns.
Works Cited
Bill C-4: An Act to Amend the Criminal Code (Conversion Therapy). https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/charter-charte/c4_1.html.
Cooke, Alex. “N.B. Makes Minor ‘Clarifications’ to Policy 713 after Being Told It Violated the Charter.” Global News, 23 Aug. 2023, https://globalnews.ca/news/9914354/nb-changes-policy-713/.
Khan, Ahmar. “Doug Ford Counters Greenbelt Scandal Protest with Attacks on School Boards about Handling of LGBTQ+ Youth Issues.” Global News, 9 Sept. 2023, https://globalnews.ca/news/9950382/greenbelt-scandal-doug-ford-attacks-schools-boards-lgbtq-youth/.
“Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Rights in Canada.” The Canadian Encyclopedia, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/lesbian-gay-bisexual-and-transgender-rights-in-canada. Accessed 29 Oct. 2023.
Mertz, Emily. “Gender-Affirming Health Coverage by Canadian Province, Territory.” Global News, 23 June 2022, https://globalnews.ca/news/8900413/gender-affirming-healthcare-province-territory-transgender/.
Tait, Carrie. “Health Canada Ends Ban on Blood Donations from Gay Men.” The Globe and Mail, 29 Apr. 2022, https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-health-canada-ends-ban-on-blood-donations-from-gay-men/.
Treisman, Rachel. “After Two Failed Attempts, Canada Bans Conversion Therapy.” NPR, 9 Dec. 2021, https://www.npr.org/2021/12/09/1062720266/canada-bans-conversion-therapy.
Conversion Therapy
Conversion Therapy
Caitlin N.
Published on TBD
In 1899 at a scientific conference, German physicist Albert von Schrenck-Notzing took the audience by storm, announcing that he had cured a man of homosexuality through hypnotherapy (Blakemore). Of course, this was an incorrect statement not only in the 21st century, but also in the 20th century when Schrenck-Notzing was accused by others in the scientific community of being a pseudoscientist (Sommer). Nonetheless, his allegations, despite having no grounds, set in motion an onslaught of pain and anguish to the queer community in the form of conversion therapy.
Brief History
In its earliest form during the 1900s, conversion therapy utilized many inhumane techniques such as lobotomies, electrocution and castration (Blakemore). However, throughout the years, conversion therapy changed. During the 1960s, aversion therapy came to be a method in which queer patients were conditioned to associate homosexuality with a negative and unbearable stimulus (Sangu). By 1973, homosexuality was declassified as an illness by the American Psychiatric Association, and then in 1982 the Canadian Psychiatric Association followed suit (Raymundo). Despite the declassification of homosexuality as an illness, the prevalence of conversion therapy remained. The practice was taken over by self proclaimed experts and faith based groups who led these therapies, employing techniques such as isolation, talk therapy, and exorcism (Viders and Byers). Victims had to endure immense amounts of physical abuse and in some cases, sexual abuse. Nowadays, conversion therapy is banned in Canada, along with the act of taking anybody under 18 years of age outside of Canada to attend conversion therapy (Bill C-14). Sadly, the ban is still not common in other countries such as the United States and the UK where conversion therapy still harms the queer community.
The Effects of Conversion Therapy and Better Solutions
Conversion therapy has been discredited by numerous health and psychological associations and institutions (HRC foundation). Many say that they are not effective, have no basis and cause much damage to victims ranging from shame, anger, depression, PTSD and suicide (Forsythe). In contrast, a better way to deal with an individual's struggles regarding their sexual orientation is affirmative therapy. It is a form of psychotherapy that advocates and validates clients’ sexual and gender orientation (Forsythe).
Throughout the decades, conversion therapy has proved itself to be baseless, useless and harmful to many people in the LGBTQ community. Harmful and long lasting effects have proven to be detrimental to the victims who underwent conversion therapy. No individual should be subjected to such torture, yet many places in the world still allow for its practice. It is important to note that in Canada, it is illegal to do such practices and if anybody does try to take an individual out of Canada to attend conversion therapy, it is advised that the government of Canada be contacted for help.
Works Cited
Blakemore, Erin. “Gay Conversion Therapy’s Disturbing 19th-Century Origins.” HISTORY, 22 June 2018, https://www.history.com/news/gay-conversion-therapy-origins-19th-century.
Forsythe, Anna. “Humanistic and Economic Burden of Conversion Therapy Among LGBTQ Youths in the United States.” JAMA Pediatrics, vol. 176, no. 5, May 2022, pp. 493–501, doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.0042.
Hinrichs , Kate L. M., and Weston Donaldson . “Recommendations for Use of Affirmative Psychotherapy With LGBT Older Adults.” National Library of Medicine, 2017.
Sangu, M. “Aversion Therapy - an Overview.” ScienceDirect Topics, https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/aversion-therapy. Accessed 28 Feb. 2024.
Sommer, Andreas. “Policing Epistemic Deviance: Albert Von Schrenck-Notzing and Albert Moll(1).” Medical History, vol. 56, no. 2, Apr. 2012, pp. 255–76, doi:10.1017/mdh.2011.36.
“The Lies and Dangers of ‘Conversion Therapy.’” Human Rights Campaign, https://www.hrc.org/resources/the-lies-and-dangers-of-reparative-therapy. Accessed 28 Feb. 2024.
Vider, Stephen, and David S. Byers. “A Half-Century of Conflict Over Attempts to ‘Cure’ Gay People.” Time, 12 Feb. 2015, https://time.com/3705745/history-therapy-hadden/.
“A Half-Century of Conflict Over Attempts to ‘Cure’ Gay People.” Time, 12 Feb. 2015, https://time.com/3705745/history-therapy-hadden/.
Google Sites
Report abuse