Burden of care, province of women.

A good piece of advice on any occasion, but particularly good advice for going into arguments, conferences and conventions, my friend Emily Davila told me, "Listen for what is not being said." Later, after the IAC, Emily voiced her concern that discussions about the burden of care were neglected in the conference. There was only one panel addressing the burden of care, The AIDS Care Economy and the Burden on Women, and it was scheduled at the same time as a session titled The USA HIV Epidemic in 2008. The day of the opening session of the IAC the CDC announced critical errors in the gathering of epidemiological data which resulted in the grave misrepresentation of the AIDS epidemic in the USA. In point of fact, the CDC had underreported HIV infections in the US by 40%. Needless to say, many (myself included) decided to forgo the session on the burden of care to hear what Kevin Fenton of the CDC had to say for himself (more on that later - I assure you). Although there was no way for the planners of the conference to have anticipated the overwhelming, resurgent interest in the American AIDS epidemic it was nonetheless a slight in programming for such an important matter to have only had one session devoted to it.
As I wrote in a previous post two-thirds of all caregivers for people living with AIDS in Africa are girls and women. Deeply entrenched societal views on the place and work of women, and the value of women's work product, have exacerbated the extent to which the burden of care has grown wild - unchecked, unstudied and largely ignored. Caring for ill family members, neighbors and children is work that falls largely to women because the sick room has long been believed to be the province of women. While the pervasive corrosiveness of a stereotyped view of femininity responsible for this belief is deeply problematic, an exploration of the corresponding economies of care requires a simultaneous examination of why it is that the work done in the sick room, in the service of the dying, has not been deemed work at all, but a duty that requires no remuneration.

The best way to support children is to keep their parents alive.

Human rights are easier to endorse than enforce.

Finally! A plenary on MSM.

Finally! A plenary on MSM.

This exclamation, followed by thunderous applause opened Jorge Saavedra's plenary session titled Sex between Men. Activist friends the previous day had said that the IAC in Mexico City was going to be to MSM issues what the 2000 conference in Durban was to the African epidemic. Saavedra's lecture was far and away the most exciting of all the lectures I saw at the conference. But how is it that we are 27 years into the epidemic and only this year at the 17th International AIDS Conference was there a plenary lecture on MSM? Only now, when in 1981 Larry Kramer founded Gay Mens Health Crisis (GMHC) and in 1987 AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT-UP)? Only now, when the leadership of these organizations along with other LGBT activists began public discourse and challenged governments at the very start of this global crisis? Among gay men in the United States, HIV incidence fell by 75% during the 1980s. This was in large part because of the tireless and extraordinary leadership in the gay community. During a meeting of the LGBTA Caucus (A = Allies) at the Ecumenical Pre-Conference on HIV and AIDS, a concern that was voiced over and over was that the shifting nature of the pandemic (the growing number of orphans and vulnerable children, the "feminization" of the pandemic, etc.) has forced gay and lesbian activists back into the closet. Hard won battles have escaped the attention of history. This cannot stand and Dr. Saavedra's plenary lecture was a step in the right direction.