Reply
Mon 3 Mar, 2003 12:19 pm
There are a lot of myths about why Aids is widespread in Africa.
But the facts, says Hugh Russell in latest issue of 'The Spectator', are more bizarre:
link to article
Well, that was pretty shocking. I read as much of it as I could stomach. And yes, it is worse than I thought...
Ah..finally a hint at the correlation between African Aids epidemic and circumsized vs uncircumsized men...yeah! Ive been waiting a while to get more information on that one...and that certainly ties it together in something more definate and testworthy than the circumcision stance all alone.
<and people thought I was nuts>
Interesting that the developments and further studies in the different areas and tribes what items of heritage, beliefs, etc that could be having an effect.
Sad that it is so very widespread and such an enormous epidemic however.
Interesting article, Walter. I do see one typo.
FIn his State of the Union message President Bush promised trillions of dollars to fight HIV/Aids in Africa. Those of us with satellite television saw him do it. But his words were virtually ignored by our local newspapers, perhaps because our editors suspect that the White House has other things on its mind at present.
Trillions have not been promised.
Of course, they could not be promised. All the annual budget of the USA is a bit more than three trillion dollars.
Doesn't anyone use condoms over there?
After reading about those practices, condoms may as well be not yet invented. Those customs must date back millennia...
Quote:WASHINGTON, May 11 (IPS) - US President George W. Bush announced Friday that Washington will contribute 200 million dollars to a proposed global fund to fight HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases. AIDS and Africa activists immediately denounced the offer as far too little given the magnitude of the problem
slappy
Have a lokk at this site:
Promoting Condom Use
The article proposed by Mr. Hinteler prompted me some crazy idea that may work, IMO. It may be possible to persuade the authoritative sorcerers that have strong influence on the Africans to impose 100 years of moratorium on the dangerous traditions. The persuasion means may be very simple, namely, money. Yes, I think that it is necessary to bribe the leading sorcerers, shamans, etc. to make them to promote safe sex. They will just invent one more fairy tale to justify the necessity of condom usage, and reasons to abstain from having sex with the dead husband's relative or some substitute. Africans tend to trust their sorcerers more than they trust doctors or governmental officials. Granted, the living standards in Africa are extremely low, this must not be too expensive.
A few comments on a matter of high importance:
1. The "ghost" tradition seems, to my Western understanding, a social (tribal) legitimation for widows to have sex after their husband's death. What would change without the ghost tradition?: something near to nothing.
2. The "fraternity" and "dry sex" traditions seem harder to understand and, also, seemingly harder to change.
The main question is, still, information about the disease and how it is contagious. The same article points out that many Aids related death in Zambia are not counted as such.
Even if, I think any anthopologist would say that bribery hardly ever changes traditions, I know marketing has (Tzeltal indians in the Chiapas region were convinced that Pepsi was as good as the native Posh for offerings, only less expensive). What about some condom brand that guarantees driving-off ghosts, keeping the fraternity or a tight feeling?