The latest "gay disease," apparently -- if you listen to the right-winghysterics such as Peter LaBarbera and the NYT. Here's a post from Michael Petrelis debunking the mythology as perpetrated by the aforementioned "reliable sources."
The major part of Petrelis' post is a letter from Duncan Osborne to NYT challenging the reporting by Lawrence K. Altman. In essence, aside from the overwhelming credulity displayed by Altman in his reporting (a characteristic of contemporary reporters -- I can't call them journalists -- as a whole), there are quite a few misstatements of fact and the article as a whole is grossly misleading regarding the role gay men are playing in the spread of these new strains of staph. MRSA is already a major health problem in the US and Europe -- we, as Osborne points out, are only the latest population to be affected. The first outbreaks were among children and athletes.
Here's an earlier post by zbriboy at Pam's House Blend, with more information on the scapegoating.
I probably don't have to point out how tired I am of this sort of thing. I remember very clearly when the disease was AIDS and the focus of the press was on transmission among gay men -- although the disease was rampant in Africa and transmission was almost exclusively through heterosexual contact. Aside from providing fodder for the right-wing anti-gay crazies (not that they need fodder -- they've demonstrated repeatedly that they can make it up out of whole cloth; I guess the Ten Commandments are for other people, sort of like sexual abstinence and monogamy), this sort of thing is just irresponsible reporting. It used to be called "yellow journalism" when William Randolph Hearst was doing it, and I don't see that it's any different when NYT does it. Here's a link to the Times article. It reads too much like similar reports in the 1980s. And, looking at it, what it reports casts the whole slant of the article into doubt:
The infection can cause unusually severe problems, including abscesses and skin ulcers. The bacteria can invade through the skin to produce necrotizing fasciitis, giving them the popular name of flesh-eating bacteria. They can also cause pneumonia, damage the heart and produce widespread infection through the blood.
Altman makes no comment on the fact that if this bacterium can be spread through casual contact, there is no reason to single out gay men as a vector. Instead, the parrots the researchers' focus on gay men (and did they do any work on other groups, one wonders) without so much as a lifted eyebrow.
All in all, it's a fairly appalling example of the state of journalism today.
2 comments:
I hear you talking, Hunter.
And the entire situation continues to get ludicrous. Our friend Peter published a letter by someone blaming him and his rhetoric for the possible spread of the virus.
While he may have published it to get some pity points, the letter actually makes sense.
It's a matter of intellectual laziness and irresponsibility on the part of journalists, coupled with an historic and deep-seated antipathy toward the "other," contemporary religious wingnut variety -- i.e., us.
This is just another facet of the tendency created by the far right to depict same-sex relationships as purely carnal (as if that had no value, which is another reason I think these people are fundamentallyl sick), denying our humanity and refusing to recognize that our relationships have the same components that theirs do -- minus the enforced subservience of one partner.
I also think we're the favored target because we're easy to misrepresent -- Altman's article, not to mention the press release that started this whole thing, is a prime example. I think it is absolutely true that they couldn't get away with misrepresenting any other historically disfavored group in that way -- they'd simply be shouted down for what they are: bigots. And if the Wildmons of the world can hold up an "enemy" to motivate their followers, so much the better for them -- and their treasure chest.
This is the sort of thing that has to be resisted, vocally and repeatedly, by whatever means any of us has, whether it's letters to the editor, challenging people in conversation, or blogging it.
Go to it.
Post a Comment