[youtube]N_7koJ4xYBY[/youtube]
Actress Rosie Perez is part of a new HIV/AIDS awarness campaign. The series of television public service announcements premiered last week on the LOGO Channel.
This is not your mother’s public service announcement.
Tackling the rise in HIV, crystal meth use, and unsafe sex among gay men with candid yet loving honesty, a groundbreaking public service announcement campaign starring Susan Sarandon, Whoopi Goldberg, Rosie Perez, and Amanda Peet will debut in advance of World AIDS Day commemorations on December 1st.
A collaboration between HIV Forum NYC and the Callen-Lorde Community Health Center, both based in New York City, the national ad campaign breaks new ground by enlisting female spokespersons to highlight the essential role that love, respect, and self-esteem play in helping gay men lead safe, healthy, and fulfilling lives.
“Despite knowing that condoms prevent HIV transmission, many gay men continue to engage in risky and self-destructive behavior,” said Dan Carlson, co-ounder of HIV Forum NYC. “As we mark World AIDS Day and the 25th anniversary of the discovery of HIV, we wanted to reframe the conversation among gay men about condom use and redefine what that simple act means.”
FYI… I emailed Patrick from the public relations firm that is promoting this campaignt that I was happy to help. But I couldn’t in good conscience — as a gay Republican blogger — post anything at GayPatriot involving Susan Sarandon! Ughhhhhh!
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Despite knowing that condoms prevent HIV transmission
Interesting assumption. Saying condoms prevent HIV transmission is like saying that condoms prevent pregnancy. They’re surprisingly ineffective in preventing either.
Julie the Jarhead
— Who used to work in an HIV research lab.
Julie the Jarhead
Julie, are we really going to go there? Condoms, when properly used, are EXTREMELY effective in preventing both pregnancy and HIV transmission. To deny hormonal young people their benefit by NOT TEACHING PROPER USE and espousing the COMPLETELY UNFEASABLE abstinence approach is tantamount to criminal negligence.
I think the evidence pretty much suggests that condoms work at preventing the spread of HIV. I have communicated with several guys in “sero-discordant” (relationships where one partner has HIV and the other does not) where they always use condoms for intercourse and the negative partner remains negative.
Oh good grief. Get a grip GP.
Colin, I found your statement rather revealing:
To deny hormonal young people their benefit by NOT TEACHING PROPER USE and espousing the COMPLETELY UNFEASABLE abstinence approach is tantamount to criminal negligence.
And therefore, to deny young people the benefits of driving, alcohol use, tobacco use, medical consent, and ability to sign contracts by not teaching proper use and espousing the completely unfeasible abstinence approach is, also tatamount to criminal negligence.
If a ten-year old should be taught how to have sex and use a condom, I fail to see why they shouldn’t be allowed to drive, drink, smoke, sign binding agreements, and consent to medical procedures. After all, if they’re responsible and trustworthy enough to have sex and always use protection, why not any of the other?
Abstinence education is all about teaching kids the single most important thing to be learned about sex — how to override your hormones and say “no” when the situation is not right.
But abortion clinics make no money off people who abstain or use sex responsibly; they make it off the people who are willing to pay hundreds of dollars to erase an “oops”. Just as payroll loan sharks target those who have a history of making bad money decisions, abortionists and their gay leftist allies target groups who have a history of making bad decisions when it comes to sex and systematically try to encourage them to do so.
NDT, I think it is a great idea for children to not have sex for a variety of reasons. But while there is some controls (other than being told that it’s bad) regarding smoking, drinking, driving, etc., there isn’t much control when you have two teenagers together. I think it is unrealistic to assume and expect all teenagers to not have sex.
I am curious though of the readers here, whether for adstinence only education or not, did wait until they were at least 18 to have sex.
I’ll start. I’m in the at least 18 category.
By the way, my point is not to expose hypocrisy, since I could understand someone having sex at 16, but later thinking that that was a bad idea. But to see to get an idea on how realistic abstinence only education is.