[FB] 同志熱線 #殺人的不是HIV是污名!!!消失
FB卦點說明:
針對賴清德院長日前說的
台灣愛滋是男男同性戀之間引起
同志大本營再度發表了看法
認為愛滋=男同志 愛滋=不道德
是對於男同志的指控汙名,並不是事實描述
最後強調了可怕的是汙名化,並不是愛滋本身
FB連結:
https://www.facebook.com/TaiwanHotline/
FB內容:
【殺人的不是HIV,是汙名】
好文推薦時間到!
引文:
賴清德9月22日接見第27屆醫療奉獻獎得獎人時指出:「現在愛滋病的病人,主要的來源
,已經不是針筒引起的,而是同性戀、男男同性戀之間所引起的。」賴宣稱「說的是事實
,只是表達統計事實」。自以為描述事實,語意卻直指「因果關係」。
「愛滋=男同志」、「愛滋=不道德」這些論點對男同志社群是深深的烙印,讓男同志們一
直承擔巨大的汙名壓力,在生活中、伴侶關係中或社會處境上,不時就會冒出來拉扯刺傷
。誤用統計傳達因果論述所造成的傷害,絕不是說者自稱的「事實描述」,而是對男同志
整體的「指控」了。
賴清德的說法並不罕見,就是一種落伍的防疫語言。昔日衛教就是用這些說法做「防疫」
,但根據歷史經驗,這對防疫毫無助益。強化疾病與身份連結,對社會大眾傳達了:「感
染愛滋只和男同志有關,如果不是男同志就不會感染。」使異性戀以為愛滋不會找上門,
忽視愛滋知識對保護自己的重要性,反而成為防疫的最大死角。
標籤化從來就不是有效的防治教育。特殊標籤化加上愛滋汙名,使得更多同志害怕篩檢、
篩檢後不敢就醫,反而不利於及早發現、及早治療的防疫目的。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 27.242.76.187
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Gossiping/M.1506484716.A.9F5.html
噓
09/27 11:58, , 1F
09/27 11:58, 1F
→
09/27 11:59, , 2F
09/27 11:59, 2F
噓
09/27 11:59, , 3F
09/27 11:59, 3F
推
09/27 11:59, , 4F
09/27 11:59, 4F
噓
09/27 11:59, , 5F
09/27 11:59, 5F
噓
09/27 11:59, , 6F
09/27 11:59, 6F
噓
09/27 11:59, , 7F
09/27 11:59, 7F
噓
09/27 11:59, , 8F
09/27 11:59, 8F
噓
09/27 11:59, , 9F
09/27 11:59, 9F
→
09/27 12:00, , 10F
09/27 12:00, 10F
噓
09/27 12:00, , 11F
09/27 12:00, 11F
噓
09/27 12:00, , 12F
09/27 12:00, 12F
噓
09/27 12:00, , 13F
09/27 12:00, 13F
噓
09/27 12:00, , 14F
09/27 12:00, 14F
噓
09/27 12:00, , 15F
09/27 12:00, 15F
推
09/27 12:01, , 16F
09/27 12:01, 16F
噓
09/27 12:01, , 17F
09/27 12:01, 17F
噓
09/27 12:02, , 18F
09/27 12:02, 18F
噓
09/27 12:02, , 19F
09/27 12:02, 19F
噓
09/27 12:02, , 20F
09/27 12:02, 20F
→
09/27 12:03, , 21F
09/27 12:03, 21F
噓
09/27 12:03, , 22F
09/27 12:03, 22F
噓
09/27 12:03, , 23F
09/27 12:03, 23F
噓
09/27 12:04, , 24F
09/27 12:04, 24F
噓
09/27 12:04, , 25F
09/27 12:04, 25F
噓
09/27 12:04, , 26F
09/27 12:04, 26F
噓
09/27 12:04, , 27F
09/27 12:04, 27F
→
09/27 12:04, , 28F
09/27 12:04, 28F
推
09/27 12:05, , 29F
09/27 12:05, 29F
→
09/27 12:05, , 30F
09/27 12:05, 30F
噓
09/27 12:05, , 31F
09/27 12:05, 31F
→
09/27 12:05, , 32F
09/27 12:05, 32F
→
09/27 12:05, , 33F
09/27 12:05, 33F
噓
09/27 12:05, , 34F
09/27 12:05, 34F
噓
09/27 12:06, , 35F
09/27 12:06, 35F
噓
09/27 12:06, , 36F
09/27 12:06, 36F
→
09/27 12:06, , 37F
09/27 12:06, 37F
→
09/27 12:06, , 38F
09/27 12:06, 38F
→
09/27 12:06, , 39F
09/27 12:06, 39F
推
09/27 12:06, , 40F
09/27 12:06, 40F
→
09/27 12:07, , 41F
09/27 12:07, 41F
噓
09/27 12:07, , 42F
09/27 12:07, 42F
噓
09/27 12:07, , 43F
09/27 12:07, 43F
噓
09/27 12:08, , 44F
09/27 12:08, 44F
→
09/27 12:09, , 45F
09/27 12:09, 45F
→
09/27 12:10, , 46F
09/27 12:10, 46F
噓
09/27 12:11, , 47F
09/27 12:11, 47F
噓
09/27 12:11, , 48F
09/27 12:11, 48F
噓
09/27 12:12, , 49F
09/27 12:12, 49F
→
09/27 12:12, , 50F
09/27 12:12, 50F
噓
09/27 12:13, , 51F
09/27 12:13, 51F
噓
09/27 12:14, , 52F
09/27 12:14, 52F
噓
09/27 12:17, , 53F
09/27 12:17, 53F
推
09/27 12:18, , 54F
09/27 12:18, 54F
噓
09/27 12:18, , 55F
09/27 12:18, 55F
噓
09/27 12:18, , 56F
09/27 12:18, 56F
噓
09/27 12:19, , 57F
09/27 12:19, 57F
噓
09/27 12:23, , 58F
09/27 12:23, 58F
噓
09/27 12:23, , 59F
09/27 12:23, 59F
→
09/27 12:24, , 60F
09/27 12:24, 60F
推
09/27 12:27, , 61F
09/27 12:27, 61F
噓
09/27 12:27, , 62F
09/27 12:27, 62F
噓
09/27 12:31, , 63F
09/27 12:31, 63F
→
09/27 12:32, , 64F
09/27 12:32, 64F
推
09/27 12:34, , 65F
09/27 12:34, 65F
噓
09/27 12:37, , 66F
09/27 12:37, 66F
→
09/27 12:38, , 67F
09/27 12:38, 67F
→
09/27 12:40, , 68F
09/27 12:40, 68F
噓
09/27 12:41, , 69F
09/27 12:41, 69F
推
09/27 12:43, , 70F
09/27 12:43, 70F
噓
09/27 12:44, , 71F
09/27 12:44, 71F
噓
09/27 12:45, , 72F
09/27 12:45, 72F
→
09/27 12:48, , 73F
09/27 12:48, 73F
噓
09/27 12:53, , 74F
09/27 12:53, 74F
噓
09/27 12:54, , 75F
09/27 12:54, 75F
推
09/27 12:58, , 76F
09/27 12:58, 76F
噓
09/27 13:00, , 77F
09/27 13:00, 77F
→
09/27 13:00, , 78F
09/27 13:00, 78F
噓
09/27 13:48, , 79F
09/27 13:48, 79F
噓
09/27 13:49, , 80F
09/27 13:49, 80F
噓
09/27 16:12, , 81F
09/27 16:12, 81F
噓
09/27 17:48, , 82F
09/27 17:48, 82F
噓
09/27 21:35, , 83F
09/27 21:35, 83F
→
09/27 21:35, , 84F
09/27 21:35, 84F
噓
09/27 21:57, , 85F
09/27 21:57, 85F
噓
09/28 09:27, , 86F
09/28 09:27, 86F
討論串 (同標題文章)
以下文章回應了本文 (最舊先):
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 3 篇):