Black Sexual Politics: African Americans, Gender and the New Racism

".... in the context of the new racism, men and women who rescue and redefine sexuality as source of power rooted in spirituality, expressiveness, and love can craft new understandings of Black masculinity and Black femininity needed for a progressive Black sexual politics." - Patricia Hill Collins (page 51)

Author: Patricia Hill Collins

I've decided to spend two weeks on this book, because so much of the content directly relates to the topic of this course and my eventual research project. Black sexual politics in many ways determine the spread of HIV/AIDS among black people. Going into this reading I assumed the term black sexual politics, referred to the ways in which black people related to and interacted with one another sexually. On one level I was right, but for Collins, sexual politics are somewhat more... political.

In the introduction and the first section of the book titled "African Americans and the new racism" Collins makes a case for a new type of racism that exists within American society. Her definition of the term seems to be something she is working through within the text, because she never explicitly states a clear one. Based on the black experience in America, from African colonialism, through slavery and into the post civil rights era Collin describes the development of a new type of racism that is a deeply imbedded ideological forms of societal slavery. Without stating it explicitly, the new racism that Collins refers to seems related to structuralist theories in that it is a less explicit racism that is deeply embedded in the consciouness of black and non-blacks alike and, more significantly, into the fabrics of contemporary American society. It exists within the structures of society.

The sexual politics that Collins addresses in the text stem from this new racism. She writes that "Black sexual politics occur at the particular intersection of gender, race and sexuality," (6). What Collins argues, essentially, is that gender issues, racism and other forms of social disparities or oppression among Black people in American society are all deeply linked. She explains that achieving social justice requires addressing all levels of oppression or inequality. In the introduction she uses a childhood anecdote about an experience of racism to enter the topic. She concludes that "knowledge and power are deeply linked, and achieving social justice requires attending to both," (3). From there she shows how gender and race issues are also linked.

While what Collins argues makes sense on a basic level, I find myself waiting for her to convince me of it completely while reading the text. I agree that addressing homosexuality among black communities and the struggles of black LGBTQ people is a key element of addressing larger race issues in America, really it only makes sense. But, Collins states it so adamantly that I need her to explain why. She does. She explains the reasons behind LGBTQ people historically having been ignored in a discussion about slavery and emancipation and why the issues the group faces need to be addressed now. What it comes down to for Collins, I think, is that nothing exists in isolation and to assume so will make it that much harder to find solutions to problems like racism and systematic inequities.

So this isn't just a book about black sexuality, but about the interconnectedness of sexuality gender and race. It is heavier on the politics but links them to sexuality and gender and race. Collins also discusses the fact that the black experience of racism and other forms of oppression are gendered, meaning that the black female experience of racism stems from different assumptions about her sexuality or gender and race than the black male's; this then means that how those assumptions play out are also different. For example, Collins explains how racial stereotypes about blacks differ for black men and women, wherein the women are seen as inherently promiscuous and the men naturally hyper-sexual and violent. Collins provides a good explanation for why this perception and others like it matter. It is a part of the foundation of what has become institutionalized racism in many sectors of American society.

One quibble I have with Collins after having completed the first section of the text is how much time she spends on the historical roots of racism towards blacks in America. It is a story that has been told and dissected to death. While her ideas are new and how she applies this history to her concepts are different there were points while the book where I found myself thinking that what Collins had to say was not particularly ground breaking. But as she continues to develop the concept of this "new racism" I expect to get a lot out of this reading.

I think this book will provide a foundation for my understanding of how the spread of HIV/AIDS among black women is occuring and what factors make black women as a group more vulnerable to contracting and or spreading the disease. The next part of the reading addresses female sexuality specifically and the issue of HIV/AIDS.

Being a black female I find myself very much invested in what Collins has to say about this topic. It is very easy to say that this issue (HIV/AIDS, American racism, black sexual politics, etc.) isn't about me because I don't have HIV/AIDS and I don't live in the United States. But the fact is that how black people and women as a group are perceived in the United States and around the world has a direct impact on my life. These issues also play a role in Canada, if only for how certain prejudices about blacks formed out of American history have been normalized and have migrated north of the 49th parallel. I am not separate from this and while Collins is subtle about it, she makes it very clear that this is a topic for every black person (and non-blacks). One can't remove his/her self from the conversations, luckily I don't particularly want to.

The HIV Pandemic: Local and Global Implications

"It should be recognized that an integrated approach is needed; no single intervention operating in isolation is likely to have a significant impact on HIV incidence in a population. What works today may not work tomorrow." - Strathdee et al (page 67)

Editors: Eduard J. Beck, Nicholas Mays, Alan W. Whiteside, José M. Zuniga

I found this week's readings absolutely fascinating. It was dry and mostly based on facts, figures and statistics, but it was information I needed to know and had never encountered before. This was a change from Treichler's theory based text but also a natural next step. The knowledge I gained from last week's readings allowed me to critically evaluate the implications of the information presented in The HIV Pandemic: Local and Global Implications.

For example, I noticed that the text engaged with women as a group only as they related to the topic of mother to child transmission of the disease, which is a trend Treichler mentioned in her text. But while most of the section was focused on treatment of men who have sex with men, it was very good at acknowledging other groups and highlighting the differences in treatment options that exist within different populations both within a country and in other countries in the world.

What especially interested me in this text was the first chapter on prevention programs. Strathdee et al. outline three levels of intervention in the chapter: individual, group and community. While reading the section I began to consider how these intervention methods might apply to my group of interest, black women. The authors describe why each level may or may not be affective within a particular population. They conclude that community level interventions are the most effective based on studies involving men who have sex with men. While reading the descriptions of the different methods I found myself thinking that the community level would also be the most effective with black women in Canada because of the challenges of sustainability of the other two because of costs and the pressure on resources. Given the programs that currently exist in Ontario that target black women as a group, I have to conclude that others have agreed with me as they are primarily community level initiatives.

Other elements of the text were quite challenging to get through. Parts of it felt as if I had been transported to a university level chemistry course except that I didn't have any of the pre-requisites. I found myself pausing often to look up terms and information on the behaviour and replication of viruses. This is particularly true of the section on antiretroviral treatment and care of HIV. While complicated, the chapter does give a through explanation of how these drugs work and why they are affective in a North American context.

The section is also successful at providing a basic understanding of the many complexities of treatment. Not only are the drugs themselves hard to pronounce and they way they work harder to understand without a degree in science, but the efficacy of these treatments and their availability vary by country and level of development. The reading makes it very clear that access to certain regimens and treatment and prevention methods vary depending on the ability of a society or group within a society to afford them. This is especially relevant when it comes to my particular group of interest, because this is a very diverse group with varying levels of access to care and treatment. That being said, the fact that they are in Canada puts their treatment options far above many similar populations in other parts of the world.

The reading also makes it clear that while there has been a lot of development in treatment of HIV since it was first discovered, treatment of the virus is an ongoing and sometimes arduous process. Joep MA Lang in his chapter on antiretroviral treatments, first explains the many treatment options and how they works and describes how successful they have been. He adds a very important caveat though, which is that antiretrovirals have to be taken throughout life on strict schedule to avoid drug resistance in the virus. This lifelong treatment also leads to chronic toxicity over time with effects that may lead to disfigurement.

When I first became interested in this topic I saw a movie that chronicled the experience of four women in toronto living with HIV or AIDS. Each of them showed their daily regimen of drugs, the image of the one woman who was not taking her pills regularly and had developed full blown AIDS has remained with me. She was virtually emaciated and constantly ill from her disease and the illnesses that come along with it. She eventually died. I think the reason the film and this woman come to mind when I'm reading a very factual text on HIV/AIDS and treatment methods is to remind me that this disease is not about test subjects and chemistry--it is, at the end of it all, about the lives of people.

I learned a lot reading this text, things that I need to know and understand as I move forward with this course and my project. Treatment of this disease is a very complex process, that becomes even more complex as it targets specific groups or societies. But the most important thing I learned is that while HIV/AIDS has a lot to do with chemistry and biology (and that is where an eventual cure will stem from) I can't forget that it is a disease that is also entirely human and social.

A Feminist/Female Perspective

"... the AIDS epidemic is a feminist issue: it shows the cultural silencing of women, their exclusion from debates about their own fate, and their dependence on those who are more powerful to represent them," (Treichler 271).

I have a particular interest in gender and race in the context of HIV/AIDS because my research project is on in HIV/AIDS among black women. I just finished Treichler's chapter on AIDS, identity and gender inscription in How to Have Theory in an Epidemic. It's given me a lot to think about in terms of the role of women in the AIDS epidemic.

This chapter on women shows how, from the outset, women and particularly feminists had to fight for a seat at the table in the AIDS debate. According to Treichler, the disease was considered an upper-class, white male disease for a long period. This means women were not taken into account in terms of research, treatment, understanding the disease or even activism except as they related to men.

Treichler points out that when the disease was primarily characterized as one that mainly affected homosexual males and heterosexuals in the third world, it was that much harder for women to be acknowledged as having a role in the HIV/AIDS epidemic. This means that everything from education and prevention efforts to clinical trials and statistical research excluded or overlooked women. When women were considered it was often in the periphery, so as partners of "at risk" male groups like intravenous drug use.

In the chapter Treichler details the battle to have women, particularly lesbians, included as a potential risk group for HIV/AIDS. I would guess that without being part of the conversation or included as an at-risk group women were perhaps in some ways more vulnerable to contracting HIV. Treichler describes newpaper and magazine articles that essentially told women they weren't at risk of HIV/AIDS at all. Even scientists participated in what I consider a strange practice, there was research that concluded women were more receptacles or carriers of the virus (particularly prostitutes), but were not nearly as susceptible to AIDS as men.

I found myself thinking that if not for activists placing women on the agenda we'd be far behind where we stand in terms of the role of women in the AIDS epidemic. It's terrifying especially given the fact that the number of cases of women diagnosed with AIDS is currently increasing at one of the highest rates in Canada. It makes me wonder just how far behind the scientific research is as it relates to women and HIV/AIDS is now.

I am also left with a lot of questions. What is it about women that make them a risk group? Is there a particular type of woman and if so what is that type? How can an entire sex be categorized into one homogenous group, and if they aren't how can women be categorize?What can be done? is perhaps my most pressing question about the effect of HIV/AIDS on women. I hope that my upcoming readings will help answer some of these questions

As a journalist I seek understanding and to relay that understanding to my audience. This first reading has shown how with a topic like HIV/AIDS there is a lot more to consider and many intertwined elements to the discussion. I will have to tread, not necessarily lightly, but perhaps armed with the knowledge to needed to handle this topic as it deserves to be--recognizing its complexity and its many layers.

How to Have Theory in an Epidemic: A Cultural Chronicle of AIDS

Author: Paula A. Treichler

"AIDS is a war whose participants have been in the trenches for years, surrounded daily by death and dying, yet only gradually has the rest of the population come to know that there is a war at all." - Treichler (page 2-3).

In some ways, HIV/AIDS and research surrounding the disease is extremely practical. It is a deadly disease of the body that demands treatment. This text raises the question of whether theory even has a role in an epidemic, especially one like AIDS that is so widespread and was for so long deadly. Yet Paula Treichler, shows how and why it is important to develop theories to frame and discuss the disease among academics, medical practitioners and AIDS activists. In the process she also highlights the tensions that exist between theory and practice in efforts to understand AIDS.

Treichler begins How to Have Theory in an Epidemic by acknowledging the people who are infected with or who have died from AIDS. This adds a very human element to the discussion and the disease itself that is emphasized throughout the text. I would say this is a necessary inclusion, but AIDS at the end of the day is about people--people living with it, people contracting it, people doing research about it and people acting because of it.

Treichler's book is about the cultural development of AIDS and how the disease came to be understood and positioned in society through different groups and actors (particularly activists, clinicians and academics). She explains in the prologue that she is looking to find out what theory tells us about AIDS and what AIDS tells us about theory. She does this by discussing language and culture. Through these two concepts she addresses the larger question of what the role of theory should be in an epidemic.

What I find interesting about the text is that while Treichler shows why theory is necessary in an epidemic, I don't think she shows how exactly to have theory in an epidemic. For example, in the final chapter, "How to Have Theory in an Epidemic: The Evolution of AIDS, Treatment and Activism," Treichler chronicles the development of the disease with a particular focus on treatment related activism. While the chapter clearly shows the need for theory in discussions and debates surrounding AIDS and in some cases how theory showed up, she does not explain the role of theory or how to bring theory into the conversation. What she does show in this chapter, and what I think is important, is how to develop theory out of practical debates about HIV/AIDS. So in the case of AIDS, at least based on what Treichler writes, theory stems from practice. It's almost backwards influence compared to, for example, a field like psychology where theory influences how a psychiatrist addresses a patient's issues e.g. a Freudian approach to therapy.

Treichler uses the example of community based research programs to show how theory operates in an epidemic. It's different. She says, "this [type of work/research] is what theory in an epidemic requires," (311). She explains the value of these programs and their role in developing theory when she writes, "What is incontrovertible is that the volatile interactions entailed by these broadly inclusive debates--in both the short and long term--will have consequences not only for people with HIV infection but for the culture as a whole," (310).

When I first began to read this text, I was weary. As a journalist, I am not a fan of theory. I prefer concrete concepts and definitions. Treichler seems to understand the need for a practical approach to AIDS, but also the need to properly understand the disease conceptually and how it is viewed within the context of society. The question "what is AIDS?" can and will be answered in so many ways, by so many different people.

As a journalist and a person interested in how AIDS affects a particular population, it is important for me to understand that fact. It is absolutely imperative that I approach the disease with the understanding that not only is it a biomedical issue, but also a cultural one. Treichler's book has in many ways provided a firm foundation from which to approach the rest of my studies and research into this very complex and multifaceted disease. A disease that has changed the lives of peoples the world around.