The HIV/AIDS moral panic Essay Example

something done’ about the threat ensues and a scapegoat or ‘folk devil’ must be established to offload blame. The concept of the ‘folk devil’ was coined by Stanley Cohen to describe the deviant or enemy who’s behaviour has caused threat to the values of society. Howard Becker refers to these folk devils as ‘outsiders’ who have been labelled as deviant by those whose rules have been infracted. (Becker, H. 963) there are several characteristics which define a moral panic according to Erich Goode and Nachman Ben-Yehuda in their book Moral Panics the Social Construction of Deviance; these include a ‘heightened level of concern over the behaviour of a certain group or category and the consequences that that behaviour presumably causes for one or more sectors of society’.

Consensus, which is the widespread agreement that the perceived threat is ‘real, serious, and caused by the wrongdoing group members and their behaviour. Disproportion, meaning the exaggeration of the number of individuals engaging in the deviant behaviour and the actual harm the behaviour is causing. Volatility, which describes the nature of the moral panic as they sometimes ‘erupt fairly suddenly and, nearly as suddenly, subside. ’ There is usually underlying prejudices and political motivation when a moral panic occurs and is directed at specific groups in society which appear deviant according to the ruling majority. These groups include youth culture, illegal drugs, pornography, paedophilia, violence on television, immigration and HIV and AIDS.

One of the major ‘Moral Panics’ of the 20th century was the emergence of a mystery virus which occurred in the early 1980’s, although cases had appeared during the 1970’s and a case has

been traced back to 1959. Cases of the aggressive cancer Kaposi’s Sarcoma had been identified in young gay males in New York in 1981, this was unusual as the less aggressive strain of the cancer was usually restricted to older people. There was also an increase in cases of Pneumocystis Carinii Pneumonia (PCP) in Los Angeles.

It was noted that these symptoms seemed to only occur in homosexual males and all were suffering from an infection which defied any treatment. This observation is paramount in the events which moulded the reaction of society and has been the backbone of subsequent stereotyping and ignorance regarding the AIDS epidemic. First named GRIDS (Gay Related Immune Deficiency Syndrome) little was known about the origins of the disease and how it was transmitted that many conflicting assumptions seemed to exacerbate the heightened anxiety and fear which was being experienced.

The media and the government did not help in alleviating any of these fears and used the Aids panic to broadcast homophobic messages and using the gay community as a scapegoat or ‘folk devil. ’ With headlines in the news such as The Sun dubbing AIDS as the ‘gay plague’ it was an irresistible red rag to the bull for the media, even though in Africa other populations were infected right from the beginning. (Dowsett, W, Gary. 2009) In an excerpt from Simon Garfield’s The end of Innocence Britain in the time of AIDS, Roy Greensdale he assistant editor of the Sun from 1981 to 1986 recalls that ‘AIDS appeared to be just desserts for being involved in deviant sexual behaviour.

It was quickly realized that it

came about due to anal sex, and heterosexual executives on the Sun thus fed in the fact that it was a gay plague. AIDS tended to suggest that it might stop all that kind of behaviour, and might lead to fewer gays being about. ’ The gay community has always been an easy target for hostility throughout history and when the controversy surrounding the AIDS panic began to surface it became another way in which to ostracise them for their ‘wages of sin’. The Daily Telegraph). 1983). Politically, both in America and Britain, the idea of a Gay related illness was something which did not merit attention, never mind research funding. People died while Ronald Reagan’s administration officials ignored pleas from government scientists and would not provide the necessary funding of research until the epidemic had already spread through out the country. ( Shilts, Randy. 1987).

The fact that Ronald Reagan only first spoke of the disease in public in 1987, by that time, 59,572 AIDS cases had been reported and 27,909 had died, many of them heterosexual, the group which were reported not to be at risk. (www. actupny. org) It is also very important to note the political ideology of America and Britain at the time to explain the negative reaction to AIDS. Ronald Reagan especially understood that his power relied heavily on the huge Christian Republican Conservative community in America. These right wing values promoted the middle-class heterosexual family and consequently demonized homosexuals.

With men like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell portraying homosexuals as ‘diseased sinners’ and re-iterating the sentiment that AIDS was God’s punishment, the hostility towards the community

was increasing (Shilts, Randy 1987) It became very difficult for any sound advice to be circulated to high risk groups due to the government’s reluctance to discuss homosexual sex which resulted in most advice being organised by gay charities like the Terence Higgins trust who dispensed leaflets at gay clubs. One poignant message on one of these leaflets was ‘Help yourself! Because no one else will. ’ (Garfield, Simon. 1994)

As the disease began to infiltrate other groups in society such as drug users, haemophiliacs and heterosexuals and more was known about AIDS and HIV which is the virus that causes AIDS, the damage from the panic had already been done. AIDS victims of all social groups were stigmatised and excluded from society in areas such as employment, education, healthcare and housing. Many gay men refused to be tested as government laws refused them confidentiality. Health care workers wore gloves and masks to simply converse with patients even though it had been widely that the HIV virus could not be transmitted casually.

When challenged, the health-care workers ‘sometimes acknowledge that their behaviour is irrational, but say that wearing the gloves and masks make them psychologically more comfortable’. (Schafer, Arthur) The AIDS panic fits nicely into Goode and Ben-Yehuda’s five characteristics of a moral panic. Firstly we had the concern of a deadly disease which was perceived to be a threat to the well being of society, then the hostility towards the gay community, who were identified as the deviant group or ‘folk devils’ on which to lay blame for the atrocity.

Consensus of society agreed that this panic was real, was caused

by a deviant group, and was threatening their social values. There was disproportion and exaggeration of the threat due to mixed messages and media propaganda which used the outbreak of AIDS to vilify homosexuals in the community and vastly over estimated numbers of deaths which were predicted by the media and so called ‘health experts’.

Finally, volatility, as mentioned before, homosexuality has been subject to prejudice throughout history and was only decriminalized in 1963. This continuation of hostility has erupted in several moral panics over the years, for example, the 1977 campaign against the Dade County Florida gay rights ordinance and many more sensational stories which ignite the public’s passions on homosexuality. (Herdt, H, Gilbert. 009) The focus on the AIDS epidemic highlights that the moral panic rarely has a beneficial outcome for any sector of society. The HIV and AIDS moral panic is a heart rending story of ignorance, fear and failure of the institutions put in place to ensure the safety and well-being of its citizens. If the government had put their prejudices aside and funded research into this devastating disease then maybe thousands of lives would have been saved and its transmission reduced or even halted.

The facts still remain, thousands of people have died tragically and thousands more have been demoralized due to inadequate research and public awareness of prevention which led to further transmission, lack of knowledge and understanding of homosexuality which produced a moral crusade of shocking levels, the effects of which have never been fully eradicated, lack of government intervention and funding and cruel sensationalized propaganda perpetrated by the media causing a moral panic with deep,

lasting consequences we still live with today.