December 1 is World AIDS Day and the focus this year is on women and
girls. That's good, because almost half of all HIV-infected persons in
the world are female. But if you are a woman who is concerned about HIV
infection, I'd suggest you avoid the UNAIDS program like the plague.
Why? Because their advice just might kill you.
But I'm getting ahead of myself.
As we know, there is no vaccine or drug that can stop AIDS. But there is
one proven strategy. That
approach, which is backed by the Bush
Administration, is known as "ABC." A stands for Abstinence, B means Be
faithful, and C refers to Condoms.
The ABC concept has been implemented in Uganda over the past 15 years.
There, a massive public education campaign was mounted. Billboard signs
admonished would-be adulterers, "No Grazing." And religious
organizations were tapped to play key roles (sorry about that, ACLU).
The
results were impressive: the HIV infection rate in Uganda dropped
from 15% to 5%. In 1991, 21% of pregnant women had the deadly HIV virus.
Ten years later, that figure had dropped to 6%.
But the experts at UNAIDS don't believe in the ABCs. Why? Because they
had a strategy with a name that appealed to erotomaniacs everywhere:
Safe Sex. The Safe Sex advocates argue that since sexual activity is a
fact of life, the best we can do is offer condoms.
But two years ago the truth began to emerge.
Speakers at the 2002 Barcelona AIDS conference began to openly
admit
the failure of the Safe Sex approach. The UN Population Division offered
this dispiriting assessment: "Much effort has been spent on promoting
the prophylactic use of condoms as part of AIDS prevention. However,
over the years, the condom has not become more popular among couples."
Why did Safe Sex fail? Well, knowing that the condom failure rate is
15%, ask yourself this question: If an intimate partner of yours had
AIDS, would you trust your life to a condom?
And why didn't the UN embrace the proven ABC strategy? The answer: it's
a little too....puritanical. Abstinence is something a Bible-thumping
preacher might push -- but not the respectable public-health types at
the UNAIDS.
If the gospel of Safe Sex didn't sell, why not try the orthodoxy of The
Sisterhood?
So just last week the UNAIDS published
its
report, "Women and AIDS". If
you are interested in getting a glimpse into the radical feminist
mindset, you will find it there. You will learn how women are subject to
discrimination, domestic violence, and all manner of mistreatment - at
the hands of their male chauvinist oppressors, of course.
For example, the report tells us the amazing fact that "women and girls
provide the bulk of home-based care" -- but what does that have to do
with stopping AIDS? Feminists who believe that all heterosexual
intercourse is a form of rape will be heartened by the document's
sweeping claim that "Women and girls often lack the power to abstain
from sex."
And what if you are a woman who is looking for concrete suggestions on
how to avoid becoming infected with the deadly HIV virus? Don't go to
UNAIDS, because you will find nothing there in the way of practical
advice.
In fact you may become convinced that since women are so utterly
powerless in the face of global patriarchy, taking any action to protect
yourself would be futile.
Every day, 8,500 men and women die from the modern Black Death that we
call AIDS. Most of those deaths could be avoided if the UN took a
practical approach that is based on science, not ideology. And pitting
women against men is hardly the answer.
The UN is engulfed in a growing array of scandals: the Rwanda slaughter
that left 800,000 dead; sexual abuse by peacekeeping forces in the
Congo; the ongoing genocide in Darfur. Then there's the ever-deepening
Iraqi oil-for-food scandal - just this week we learned that Kofi Annan's
son Kojo was on the take to the tune of $2,500 a month.
Now add to that list the devastating toll of the AIDS epidemic.
