Examine the protagonist of Bear Cub, Pedro, within the context of queer desire, sexuality, and the U.S.' history of criminalizing disease. Read the two files uploaded to Week 10 and reflect on how Pedro fits within these contexts. Write honestly on how you feel about seeing an HIV+ person who is probably not undetectable (meaning the virus is active enough to be transmitted) have anonymous sex without disclosure?
Pedro connects to Lary Kramer’s Reports from the Holocaust the making of an AIDS activist because of the way that Kramer describes the deaths around him as so common that they no longer phased him. Kramer states, “phone calls advising me of another departure from this world are too routine.” In a similar way, the death of Pedro’s French lover was not given much screen time. There was only one moment when Pedro mentioned his death, even though he was a pretty active character in the beginning of the film. This exemplifies the extent of the epidemic and how so many deaths were happening that it was no longer a shock. Kramer speaks about the lack of energy in the Gay community to continue fighting and he refers to it as being “AIDSed out”. It may be possible that in a similar way, we did not see Pedros’ lover’s death and Pedro mourning for him. The director may be trying to speak on the emotional exhaustion that comes with so many dying from AIDS all around you in such a short amount of time.
ReplyDeleteTrevor Hoppe made a point in his writing titled, Punishing Disease HIV and the Criminalization of Sickness, that reminded me of a moment in the film. Hoppe wrote, “officials authority to sanction people living with infectious diseases whose behavior they determine constitutes a ‘health threat to others.’” This reminded me of the moment in the film where the boy’s grandmother used the fact that Pedro has AIDS to use it against him and sue him so that she can take custody of the boy. The way that she blackmails him saying that she will use his medical records to expose him to his patients at the dentistry proves the way that his sickness is being called a health threat to his patients. By using the law to stop him from having custody of his nephew, the film portrays how authority criminalized Pedro since he would not be seen fit to take care of him.
If I were to speak honestly, I would say that an HIV+ person that is most likely not undetectable should not have anonymous sex without disclosure. It just seems wrong to me that he knows he could potentially infect another and not care at all to say a disclaimer first. However, it is possible that Pedro did disclose to them that he was possibly not detectable, but the camera did not show it.
ReplyDeletePedro fits into the first article about the criminalization of HIV because of Teresa’s threat to take Pedro to court. She is criminalizing his sex life and using it as a tool to argue that he is not fit to raise Bernardo. Although Pedro is seeking both exclusive and nonexclusive relationships with partners, he would not be as harshly judged if he were a straight man. In his case however, Teresa scrutinized his life style so brutally that she threatened to release information that Pedro was HIV positive. While Trevor’s article focuses on federal legislation that encroaches on the rights of those affected by HIV, Teresa is turning Pedro’s life decisions into a legal matter as well.
Pedro also fits into Lary Kramer’s activist report in terms of his narration where he questions monitoring his own intimate activities with someone he might be falling in love with. Much like Lary, Pedro is very cautious with his romantically involved partner in terms of labeling the pilot as his exclusive lover. Both the film and the journal emphasize the desire for love and romance more than just intimacy.
I personally think that if it’s already considered common decency to communicate that a person may have any STD or STI, then making a disclaimer about being HIV positive should be held to the same standard. In addition to including this as a norm, it normalize disclosing such information. I also stand by the fact that not including a disclaimer about any possible STIs or STDs a person may have is not full consent. In relation to the institutionalized criminalization of AIDS, practicing complete consent would contribute to de-stigmatizing HIV/AIDS as it would be incorporated into sex education. Any sexually transmittable condition should not be criminalized but rather included in sex discourses with the dissemination of proper information in global learning institutions.
(Part 1 of 2)
ReplyDeleteMiguel Albaladejo’s (2004) Bear Cub merges elements of human sexuality, queer desire, and a kin and State-induced inclination to control their outcomes. Though Bear Cub (2004) is a Spanish film, it explores many of the same stigmas and ill-informed perception that have long informed health policies and social dynamics in the United States. The film’s protagonist, Pedro, therefore, catalyzes a conversation surrounding how these aforementioned dimensions merge and affect the lived realities of those affected by AIDS and HIV–regardless of whether in Spain (where the film is based) or in the United States. For instance in Pedro’s case, he is a well-established dentist who is independent, self-sustaining, and completely autonomous, both in his sexual and financial freedoms. In the film, Pedro is depicted as an individual who lives a sexually open life; however, he is forced to adjust his sexual habits when he becomes the sole caretaker of his nephew, Bernardo. Interestingly, during this same time Pedro is undergoing somewhat of a midlife existential crisis where he is reconsidering many of his life choices, including his commitment to his current partner. Albaladejo does a phenomenal job at creating an on-screen illustration of how Pedro’s life becomes bifurcated as a result of becoming a caretaker: that is, what his life looks like pre-Bernardo vs what his life looks like during and after the fact. Consistent with both Larry Kramer’s (1989) Reports from the Holocaust and Trevor Hoppe’s (2017) Punishing Disease, Pedro is scrutinized and criminalized for his sexual proclivities and preferences, highlighting the legacy of punitive responses (9) that are perpetuated towards the gay community as well as those living with AIDS and HIV. The aforementioned becomes most apparent when Doña Teresa, Bernardo’s grandmother, illegally acquires Pedro’s medical records which indicate that he is HIV+. By utilizing social constructs of deviance to extort Pedro, Doña Teresa plays upon the macro-level institutions that sanction that type of extortion and blackmailing in the first place without any repercussions to the latter. In other words, Doña Teresa is able to acquire what she demands because of the illicit criminalization of gay folks and folks who are HIV+. Hoppe (2017) refers to this in his book as “punishment for punishments sake” (3). In this context, Doña Teresa is only but an agent of the very same heteronormativity that is systematically and institutionally reified in family dynamics (continued).
(Part 2 of 2)
ReplyDeleteIn reviewing my notes of the film and Reports from the Holocaust, I thought about the shocking parallels that are present in both Kramer’s piece and Pedro’s character. While Pedro is merely a character in an excellently produced film, his narrative is all too telling of a macabre reality. For instance, in his essay, Kramer reveals his own sister-in-laws’ homophobic and narrow-minded understanding of AIDS and HIV when she exclaims that she knew in her “heart of hearts” that “homosexuality was an illness” (220). Said differently, Pedro’s ordeal with Doña Teresa reveals a widely held, but nevertheless erroneous perception surrounding the gay community, and individuals living with HIV and AIDS.
Taking into account Hoppe’s sociological and historical analysis of how AIDS and HIV were pathologized and criminalized provides great insight into how macro-level structures and institutions continue to define what constitutes as deviant, and thus, what is subject to penalization. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)’s website, some state laws continue to criminalize behavior “that cannot transmit HIV and apply regardless of actual transmission.” Most strikingly, “as of 2018, 26 states [still] have laws that criminalize HIV exposure.” This made me think long and hard about my own perceptions towards the transparency of partner’s who may be HIV+ (and detectable) having anonymous intercourse without revealing their HIV status. My answer to this, however, teeters between the historically repressive and punitive measures implemented by the U.S. government and which affect particularly marginalized communities. Such as was the case on the war on drugs and which is explained in great detail in Hoppe’s Punishing Disease. For that reason, the answer to this requires tremendous forethought and profound considerations of the ways which the criminalization of certain behaviors are socially informed, and in many ways economically (and capitalistically) driven. With that said, as a person who does not have AIDS and/or is not HIV+, my opinion of whether or not a person with AIDS or who is HIV+ (and detectable), is going to be heavily informed by my proximity to the issue in question. With that said, I hold that there should always be some level of transparency between partners–whether engaging in anonymous (or not) intercourse–particularly if it has health implications for both partners. However, and a BIG however, I realize that my scope of the matter is going to be heavily restricted and capped by my own experiences as well. As I’ve illustrated above, I simultaneously recognize that the stigmatization held towards certain communities extend beyond individually held perceptions and are in fact systemic and institutionally reified every day. As with most sociological inquiries, various considerations must be made as the answer is never clear, cut, and straight to the point.
Sources:
1.) HIV and STD Criminal Laws. (2019, July 1). Retrieved December 8, 2019, from https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/policies/law/states/exposure.html.
2.) Hoppe, T. (2018). Punishing disease: HIV and the criminalization of sickness. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
3.) Kramer, L. (1997). Reports from the holocaust: the story of an Aids activist. New York, NY: St. Martins Press.
Examine the protagonist of Bear Cub, Pedro, within the context of queer desire, sexuality, and the U.S.' history of criminalizing disease. Read the two files uploaded to Week 10 and reflect on how Pedro fits within these contexts. Write honestly on how you feel about seeing an HIV+ person who is probably not undetectable (meaning the virus is active enough to be transmitted) have anonymous sex without disclosure?
ReplyDeleteMiguel Albaladejo’s “Bear Cub” perfectly embodies queer desire, sexuality, parenthood, stigmitization of HIV/AIDS, and the U.S.’ history of criminalizing disease. In Trevor Hoppe’s “Punishing Disease,” Hoppe explains that the United States has historically criminalized individuals with certain contagious diseases because they are seen as a threat to the wellbeing of our society. However, it is important to note that this criminalization has purposefully impacted marginalized communities. In the case of criminalizing HIV, the impacted community has been primarily been the LGBT one. In conjunction with Hoppe’s piece, Pedro, the protagonist of the film, is socially criminalized as a result of being an HIV positive individual. This becomes evident when Bernardo, Pedro’s nephew, is taken away from him by Bernardo’s grandmother, Doña Teresa. Doña Teresa successfully manages to take Bernardo away from Pedro after receiving news that Pedro has HIV and is therefore ‘unfit’ to take care of Bernardo. Hence, as explained by Hoppe, Pedro is literally sanctioned by being deprived of his own family solely for being a queer man with HIV.
Additionally, Pedro’s circumstance can be put into conversation with Larry Kramer’s “Reports from the Holocaust.” In his piece, Kramer explains that the amount of HIV/AIDS related deaths that he witnessed in a short span of time had completely numbed him. He was no longer fazed by death. We see the same occur among Pedro within the film. Although his lover had died, little attention was given to that subject. The way the film was set up, the way Pedro was portrayed, it demonstrated how queer folks had become numb to the topic of death by HIV/AIDS.
In regards to disclosing information about a disease, I personally believe that it is vital to share with past, current, and future partners about having HIV, especially if one is HIV positive. The reality is that being intimate with someone who is HIV positive can completely change one’s life. Hence, I believe it is a matter of moral and ethics to disclose that information to someone who is willing to be intimate. However, I also acknowledge that this is easier said than done. I can only imagine how difficult it may be to disclose such a vital piece of information with another human being. Sharing this could potentially cause others to look at you differently and end up being sanctioned.
Examine Pedro from Bear Cub within the context of queer desire, sexuality, and the U.S.' history of criminalizing disease. Read the two files and reflect on how Pedro fits within these contexts.
ReplyDeleteWhen Kramer describes how he wants to hold another man, desires the experience, wants to live and love, he also demonstrates that he is also a human like everyone else. Kramer explains how he does not want to die and that he still has unfinished business. Pedro shares these same desires as Kramer. Pedro tries to live a “normal” life, he has a career, he is financially stable, and has a social life. To make his life even more “normal,” he cares for Bernardo like his own son. Pedro attains these standards that should make him happy. Yet, Pedro’s character shows distress when his deceased boyfriend is revealed. This possible void leads Pedro to hook up with men. Pedro is trying to fulfill his sexual and/or romantic life. In this aspect, Pedro also has the same “important work” to complete similar to Kramer, before they both die of AIDS (228).
Pedro’s situation is consistent with Hoppe’s context of “punitive disease control.” Hobbes explores the criminalization of HIV to regulate the disease through “coercion and punishment” (5). We see this similar behavior when Teresa, the grandmother, deliberately blackmails Pedro to surrender Bernardo due to his status. Although the film does not show a government system or agent, besides the lawyer, criminalizing Pedro, his concern and stress demonstrate that he understands the role his status would play in the court system. In this context, Pedro would be a victim of criminalization. However, it is also worth raising the question: was Teresa and her lawyer pressuring Pedro due to not disclosing his status to his sexual partners and not because he was HIV+? If so, Pedro also fits here, as Hobbes mentioned, lawmakers attempted to pass a legislation during the 80s that sought to protect sexual partners from the disease. Based on what the film showed, Pedro did not protect his sexual partners from the disease and Teresa saw that as an opportunity.
Write honestly on how you feel about seeing an HIV+ person who is probably not undetectable (meaning the virus is active enough to be transmitted) have anonymous sex without disclosure?
Once it was revealed to the audience that Pedro was HIV+, I thought it was irresponsible of Pedro to have anonymous sex without disclosure. It is careless of people to withhold their status from others, whether it is a fling or not. Whether people are “bugchasers” or not, sexual partners should be aware of each other’s status.
Pedro, Bear Cub’s protagonist, is a Bear HIV+ tio living in Madrid and working as a dentist who’s personal responsibilities are heavily heightened when his sister is tied up in her impromptu-trip-to-India-turned-jail-stay, leaving Pedro to care for and take in his nine-year-old nephew, Bernardo. As a first time viewer of Bear Cub, I was instantly drawn in the film with the opening threesome. For some time there I got lost in my ideal mind of thinking this was a simple sweet story of a Poz tio taking care of his nephew, quite blown away by the level of liberation I felt exude from Pedro as he went about his life: working, hanging out with his friends, cruising, caring for his family, and so on. As I initially contemplated this prompt and considered my feelings about seeing Pedro engage in anonymous sex without disclosing his status, I did feel a bit bothered. I sat with it and thought about the risk of possibly compromising someone else’s health. However, after reading Punishing Disease: HIV and the Criminalization of Sickness by Trevor Hope, I was confronted with my own biases I wasn’t aware of were ingrained in me. I appreciated the example used to introduce the criminalization of sickness. Hope discusses how ADHD prior to its clinical diagnosis was not identified as a sickness in children, rather they were children who behaved badly. This was not the case for HIV, “The second half of Punishing Disease looks, instead, at how HIV was transformed from sickness to badness under the criminal law, or what this book terms the criminalization of sickness” (6). This example forced me to sit with my preconceived notions about the legality of disclosure and how this illness has been completely criminalized. I also consider Larry Kramer’s reflections in Reports from the Holocaust: The Making of an AIDS activist, how he clutched onto any strength in him to live out his life fully as he experienced a dismal amount of losses (218). While I am left with more to ponder and consider than I initially believed, I also believe their is a personal responsibility that should be taken in disclosure. In terms of desirability and sexuality, prior to this question, I wasn’t aware of connections between bear culture and the arrival of AIDS and HIV. Historically, it appears as though the strength and fullness bears embody would dispel assumptions of them being positive, as their physical attributes were associated with good health. I wonder if this notion played a role in who was cast for the film. I personally felt it refreshing to see a bear on screen and all his gorgeous friends and lovers who are also bears. I especially enjoyed the storyline of him living his best life and also being an incredible caretaker to his nephew. When Bernardo’s grandmother brought in a lawyer to criminalize Pedro for his status and “lifestyle” and claim that these parts of him made him an unfit caretaker for a child, I was furious. However, considering the timeline of when the film was created, this appears to be a likely scenario and made way for a more complex story to be told.
ReplyDeleteFrom the text presented Pedro fits into the texts in several ways. Trevor Hoppe talks about the criminalization of HIV stating that “From the very beginning of the epidemic, AIDS was linked to punishment. For evangelical Americans, AIDS represented divine punishment for the moral depravity sweeping America-namely what conservatives derisely termed the ‘homosexual lifestyle.” (2) This criminalization is represented through the character of Teresa. Teresa threatens to take Pedro to court because she finds out that he is positive. She is aware of the ramifications and stigma that comes with being positive, which is why she uses it as a threat. The court would not take into account how good of a caretaker he is to Bernardo and will only see his status. He is dehumanized severely because he has HIV. Pedro is punished for something that he should not be punished for. There is no correlation between having HIV and being a good caretaker.
ReplyDelete“I believe most gay men now know more dead gay men than they realize, or allow themselves to think about.” (220) This quote from Kramer also seems to be relevant to Pedro. He is constantly reminded about his ex partner and does not reveal much about him until he is asked by Lola. Then he discloses that he passed away. This instance demonstrates how Pedro tries to not think of that memory, however, he is constantly reminded about the fate that happened to his partner because he had AIDS.
When it comes to anonymous sex I believe that an HIV+ person should disclose their status when engaging in unprotected sex. There should be a level of communication done between sexual partners. However, I understand that there is a stigma with people who have HIV/AIDS. Talking about being positive is one way to break the stigma but institutions must also be held accountable towards breaking the stigma. Politicians, schools, hospitals, and other institutions perpetuated the stigma that came with HIV and AIDS. It is also their responsibility to break that stigma considering the history that they have had during the AIDS epidemic. Talking about it is a personal step but there must also be institutions doing work to accurately inform the public.
Examine the protagonist of Bear Cub, Pedro, within the context of queer desire, sexuality, and the U.S.' history of criminalizing disease. Read the two files uploaded to Week 10 and reflect on how Pedro fits within these contexts.
ReplyDeleteBecause HIV is a sexually transmitted disease and it was immediately linked to homosexuality, for that reason, during the 198’s was tempting to criminalized HIV as merely another example of efforts to criminalize nonnormative sexuality. However, Punishing Disease reveals that punitive policies toward people living with HIV are not driven solely by interest in policing sexual morality, in fact, Punishing Disease reveals that, instead, the criminalization of HIV is but one more recent example in public health history of an efforts to control disease by coercion and punishment (pg 5) Similarly, when examining the protagonist of Bear Cub, Pedro, he is socially criminalized, after having a very successful dental practice, he is forced to endure humiliation posed by the Doña Teresa (grandmother of his sister’s son). In the film, Miguel Albaladejo’s captures the desired, sexuality and parenthood that many homosexuals were denied the privilege of loving or being a parent to a child, like in this case Pedro, who was denied the right to care for his nephew.
Similarly, Pedro’s situation could be put in the same discussion as Larry Kramer’s “Reports from the Holocaust” when he states “I don’t think any heterosexual can understand what it's like to be homosexual man today” “it is very difficult for me to make love, even ‘safely’ when the very act is now so inextricably bound up with death” Like Pedro, Larry Kramer is speaking of the punitive approaches that society put a gay person dealing with IHV/ AIDS. Although the history of punitive disease control stretches back centuries, no disease in modern American history has been met with a similarly systematic campaign to criminalize people living with the infectious disease. As seen in the film when Pedro goes out to meet guys in public places to have anonymous sex and for that, he gets blackmail not only from the Doña Teresa but also by everyone's society.
Write honestly on how you feel about seeing an HIV+ person who is probably not undetectable (meaning the virus is active enough to be transmitted) have anonymous sex without disclosure?
As a gay man leaving with HIV for over 34 years, there was a time I didn’t care whether I had protected or unprotected sex, it was until, I had 24 T Cells and going through lung cancer that I realized that I could get somebody else HIV straight, and together would create a new stronger, hard to treat mutation. After I got my health under control and got clean from Crystal Meth, it took me at least 10 years before I could have sex with someone, I thought that I was not worthy of love. Another reason that I didn’t have sex was that I was afraid of rejection. If I was up to meet my younger self or somebody else, I would tell them to use protection because life is precious, and nobody is going to take out a rubber because they care. I believe it is our own repoasonability to take care of oneself.
Examine the protagonist of Bear Cub, Pedro, within the context of queer desire, sexuality, and the U.S.' history of criminalizing disease. Read the two files uploaded to Week 10 and reflect on how Pedro fits within these contexts. Write honestly on how you feel about seeing an HIV+ person who is probably not undetectable (meaning the virus is active enough to be transmitted) have anonymous sex without disclosure?)
ReplyDeletePedro’s character is transformed after the arrival of his nephew, Bernardo. Although he does not cruise as often anymore because of the responsibility that he feels for his nephew, this does not mean that he rejects this part of his identity because we still see many traces of his previous adventures and are reminded of his erotic adulthood. Bernardo’s grandmother embodies the U.S. hatred against queers. She uses Pedro’s HIV status against him, in attempts to make him look like a criminal so that she can have custody over Bernardo and this message really spoke to its audience because we see how the disease is criminalized, yet another unethical tactic to keep this marginalized community trapped in fear. Having read the piece from Trevor Hoppe’s Punishing Disease, I focused on the quote “... authorities communicated an implicitly causal relationship between homosexuality and infection to the general public… AIDS patients were instead disfigured and/or killed by a litany of normally rare and horrifying diseases…” (7). To authorities it seems so easy to make marginalized communities suffer from their decisions because there’s no voice that stands in their way from profiting of their misery. Politicians and government officials who have high power establish certain rules and policies in order to turn society away from the problems in minority communities and condemn them for existing in a life that they can not control. Moreover, Larry Kramers’s text seems to parallel the arguments that Hoppe makes and a quote that reminded me of the film is, “Several months ago I met the first man I have allowed myself to make love with, and be safely intimate with, and consider having a relationship with--in five years” (227). This quote puts things into perspective and helps with my response abouthaving anonymouse sex without disclosing the fact that you are most likely not undetectable. On top of criminalizing gay men for having this disease and blaming their behavior to be the sole cause for this, individuals who have HIV/AIDS and don’t disclose their status may be part of the problem because they are not taking preventativ measures for the wellbeing of their partners.
In all honesty, I do not feel comfortable knowing that there are people who are probably not undetectable and have anonymous sex without disclosure. The person that you are in bed with- no matter how serious it is between the two- involves some level of trust and for there to be some sort of secrecy because the person is withholding information that could ruin the others life is a person that I can not forgive or have sympathy for. I can not judge these people because I have not been in their shoes but I do know that I would not want people to suffer for something that I caused and could have prevented had I disclosed my status.
Examine the protagonist of Bear Cub, Pedro, within the context of queer desire, sexuality, and the U.S.' history of criminalizing disease. Read the two files uploaded to Week 10 and reflect on how Pedro fits within these contexts. Write honestly on how you feel about seeing an HIV+ person who is probably not undetectable (meaning the virus is active enough to be transmitted) have anonymous sex without disclosure?
ReplyDeleteIn the film Pedro's character is given the new responsobility of taking care of his young nephew. During the opening scene it suggested and shown the Pedro was very sexual. This of course would slow down drastically because of his nephews presence. However, this didnt stop Pedro from still having a very active sex life still once his nephew got acclaimated. Pedro would be demonized by his nephews grandmother and this would create a rift between the family.
The quote I thought was applicable from the 'The Punishing Disease' written by, Trevor Hoppe; that connects to this practice of dehumanization shown within society towards HIV within the LGBTQ community as expressed within the Bear Club film says, "Second, HIV was immediately linked to stigmatized social groups that were, at that historical moment, particularly hated and, in many cases, already viewed as suspected criminals. In r98r, when the first cases of AIDS were reported, consensual sex between same-sex partners was a criminal offense in twenry-two srares and the District of Colum- bia. Initial news reports described the disease as a,,gay cancer" that was linked to marginalized social groups collectively known as the 4-H club: homosexuals, Haitians, heroin users, and hemophiliacs.33" (6). This quote shows a similar attitude that was connected to the grandmother in Bear Cub this connection stigmatizing HIV to be connected with a specific marginalized group which is gay men in this case.
The second text shows the lack of emotion, "I believe most gay men now know more dead gay men than they realize, or allow themselves to think about. I only recently discovered that the number of dead I knew was so great. For thr first several years of this epidemic, I dutifully kept a list in a little green notebook. When the number reached two hundred, sometime in 1985, I stopped. Im not quite certain why. Even then it seemed hyperbolic to discuss such a large number; or perhaps I was going through one of my periodic bout of burnout, deciding enough was enough." (220).
This normalized behavior within the community on the basis of normalizing death to the virus. This is something that is seen in the film as well.
I dont personally agree with it, I try to pride myslef on being open minded though that isnt something I feel is fair to a sexual partner. Unless, they know and are still willing to participate. Consent is a huge thing when it comes to sex and I dont think it would be fair for someone to do that.
ReplyDeleteExamine the protagonist of Bear Cub, Pedro, within the context of queer desire, sexuality, and the U.S.' history of criminalizing disease. Read the two files uploaded to Week 10 and reflect on how Pedro fits within these contexts. Write honestly on how you feel about seeing an HIV+ person who is probably not undetectable (meaning the virus is active enough to be transmitted) have anonymous sex without disclosure?
In the film Pedro's character is given the new responsobility of taking care of his young nephew. During the opening scene it suggested and shown the Pedro was very sexual. This of course would slow down drastically because of his nephews presence. However, this didnt stop Pedro from still having a very active sex life still once his nephew got acclaimated. Pedro would be demonized by his nephews grandmother and this would create a rift between the family.
The quote I thought was applicable from the 'The Punishing Disease' written by, Trevor Hoppe; that connects to this practice of dehumanization shown within society towards HIV within the LGBTQ community as expressed within the Bear Club film says, "Second, HIV was immediately linked to stigmatized social groups that were, at that historical moment, particularly hated and, in many cases, already viewed as suspected criminals. In r98r, when the first cases of AIDS were reported, consensual sex between same-sex partners was a criminal offense in twenry-two srares and the District of Colum- bia. Initial news reports described the disease as a,,gay cancer" that was linked to marginalized social groups collectively known as the 4-H club: homosexuals, Haitians, heroin users, and hemophiliacs.33" (6). This quote shows a similar attitude that was connected to the grandmother in Bear Cub this connection stigmatizing HIV to be connected with a specific marginalized group which is gay men in this case.
The second text shows the lack of emotion, "I believe most gay men now know more dead gay men than they realize, or allow themselves to think about. I only recently discovered that the number of dead I knew was so great. For thr first several years of this epidemic, I dutifully kept a list in a little green notebook. When the number reached two hundred, sometime in 1985, I stopped. Im not quite certain why. Even then it seemed hyperbolic to discuss such a large number; or perhaps I was going through one of my periodic bout of burnout, deciding enough was enough." (220).
This normalized behavior within the community on the basis of normalizing death to the virus. This is something that is seen in the film as well. When Pedro loses a partner and doesnt even speak about it but once because he is numb to the pain he feels.
I dont personally agree with it, I try to pride myslef on being open minded though that isnt something I feel is fair to a sexual partner. Unless, they know and are still willing to participate. Consent is a huge thing when it comes to sex and I dont think it would be fair for someone to do that.
Examine the protagonist of Bear Cub, Pedro, within the context of queer desire, sexuality, and the U.S.' history of criminalizing disease. Read the two files uploaded to Week 10 and reflect on how Pedro fits within these contexts.
ReplyDeleteAs soon as we are immediately introduced to Pedro, we seem him in a passionate and intimate moment which tells us he is someone who is not afraid to indulge his own sexual desires, which we find out later on he will nearly have his life ruined as a result of. Pedro is a gay dentist who suddenly has to welcome a new role, the role of caretaker to his nephew, Bernardo, who’s mother has gone on a trip to India that derailed and turned into jail stay. Pedro’s previous life and his new role as caretaker is in jeopardy once it is revealed that he could be blackmailed and lose his job and career as a dentist by Bernardo’s paternal grandmother. The threat of exposing Pedro and painting him as a threat to society that similarly creates the stigmas and perceptions that were explored in Larry Kramer’s “Reports form the Holocaust.” It also reflects the scrutiny and dismissal that those living with HIV become subject to and the various sources it comes from, like Kramer’s brother joking that his efforts writing about AIDs is his distraction from writing for income or getting some sort of job (224). In the scope of the law however, the scrutiny Pedro faces and how he is forced to succumb to legal threats of punishment, characterize the use of the Law Enforcement system to control and criminalize those with HIV as detailed in Hoppe’s “Punishing Disease HIV and the Criminalization of Sickness.” Hoppe writes, “Prosecutors and Judges continually justified their harsh sentences by calling HIV-positive defendants murderers and by casting HIV as a deadly weapon— even in cases where HIV could not have plausibly been transmitted” (12). Bernardo’s Grandmother engaging threat of legal repercussions on Pedro due to his HIV, exemplify Hoppe’s evidence of institutional punishment that add to a bleak and unfair existence similar to those individuals who were ignored or scapegoated in Kramer’s writings.
Write honestly on how you feel about seeing an HIV+ person who is probably not undetectable (meaning the virus is active enough to be transmitted) have anonymous sex without disclosure?
In my personal opinion, I think those who can transmit the disease should give full disclosure. At its simplest form HIV is still an unfortunate illness and it would be irresponsible and seemingly an act of disregard for the other person’s safety to not reveal their virus.
While I was watching the film, I thought it was wrong to see how Pedro took part in sexual intercourse without disclosing his aid status. Not only did he not say anything, but he would give other people advice about the disease. Throughout the movie there were a few times where I thought that he was going to disclose he has aids, but he didn’t. His queer desire prevented him from telling other gay men he had aids. Because he knew that once he told them he had aids they wouldn’t want to have intercourse with him. Unlike Pedro, Kramer takes into consideration the consequences that come from having intercourse with someone who has aids, when he states, “Can any straight person understand what it like to want to make love but to be terrified that to do so means possible death?”. (Kramer, pg.228 ) Because of the quote above, I find Pedro’s behavior wrong because his silence is kills. For example, in the article, “Reports from the holocaust: the making of an AIDS activist” by Larry Kramer, the author states, “I believe most gay men now know more dead gay men than they realize or allow themselves to think about.” (Kramer,220)
ReplyDeleteHowever, if this film would have taken place in the United States instead of Argentina, there would have been consequences for his actions. For example, in the article, “ Punishing Disease; HIV And The Criminalization of Sickness” by Trevor Hoppe, where the author states, “These new offenses resemble what prosecutors call a “crime of omission”: by failing to reveal their HIV status to their partners, HIV-positive people in dozens of states can now face stiff prisons penalties in charged under these felonies.” This meant people like Pedro would be sentenced to years in prison if they didn’t disclose. This is important because to some extent it could help prevent people from being diagnosed with aids, because people would become more aware. However, in some cased this would increase the rates of heterosexual men being sentenced to prison. Personally, I’m not sure whether the passing of this law was more beneficial than harmful because I don’t have enough information, because the article just pointed out the negative effects.
-Written by Jennifer G. Lopez
DeleteIn Bear Cub (2004) Pedro’s character demonstrate hostile behavior from Teresa after trying to win custody of Bernardo. Although Pedro is financially well-off and has done everything in his capacity to provide for Bernardo, Teresa threatens Pedro with using Pedro’s illegally acquired medical records. She states that she can claim that he has not disclosed his medical history with patients or with Bernardo and has put them at risk. This scene related to Trevor Hoppe’s Punishing Disease in the context of how twenty-eight state in the United States have laws that criminalize people who are HIV-positive for not disclosing their medical history with partners (8). Teresa not only threatens taking away Bernardo, but her actions can have repercussions in his personal practices as a dentist. Furthermore, while we are not told if Teresa knows that Violeta has HIV, she somehow tried to find something on Bernardo and since he is gay, she probably assumed he may have something. The movie touches on stigmas amongst the gay community and we see the hostility in it because we see how Teresa tried to prevent Bernardo from seeing Pedro. I think this stigma is related to Hoppe’s piece because he states that HIV was first called “‘gay cancer’ that was linked to marginalized social groups… homosexuals, Haitians, heroin users, and hemophiliacs”(6). Again, the stigma and history surrounding the gay community can cause some discomfort around disclosing their HIV within society.
ReplyDeleteBear Cub and Reports from the Holocaust both share a similar setting in which people in the gay community are passing away from AIDs. In Bear Cub, Pedro briefly mentions that his French lover has passed away from AIDs. This brief scene is almost exactly what Kramer discusses in his piece about “men passing along information of deaths casually interspersed in the flow of whatever else they’re talking about” (220). Pedro’s reaction to simply move on is likely due to the fact that he has seen other of his lovers pass away. Even when he is hospitalized, his lover comes to visit him and the man next to him talks about how he has been hospitalized many times. There is almost an apathetic atmosphere to knowing that his lover passed away and it is probably because he has seen many of the people in his community pass away as Kramer explains in his book.
Personally, I think it is very important to disclose HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, especially when it can change the course of someone’s life. It is important to practice safe sex because although a person may know they are in good health, they never know if the person is telling them the truth or not. I felt uncomfortable seeing people have unprotected sex knowing that the virus is active in them because they should be working to prevent the virus from spreading.
The opening scene of Bear Cub makes it clear that Pedro enjoys casual sex. Bernardo’s presence causes a shift in Pedro’s life, and his sex life becomes less pronounced. Doño Teresa is determined to gain custody of her grandson and threatens Pedro with his HIV+ status. Hoppe discusses the criminalization of HIV/AIDS, and this is reflected in the way that Doño Teresa uses Pedro’s status as a tool of manipulation. In court, Pedro would be treated like a criminal for his status, rather than acknowledgment of him living with a contagious disease. Later in the film, Pedro contracts pneumonia, which emphasize Hoppe’s point criminalization of the disease further perpetuates a stigma and puts those living with a positive diagnosis in vulnerable positions. Kramer adds a different dimension to the HIV/AIDS discussion. The way Kramer discusses his diagnosis in relation to falling in love and starting a new relationship, after losing all the men he has loved to AIDS and the complex relationship he himself has with sex, differs from the more “academic” discussion that Hoppe leads. This makes me question if Pedro engages in casual sex because it’s easier than risking losing someone. When his lover informs Pedro that he could come to Spain, Pedro gives no reaction.
ReplyDeleteThe only requirement for sex should be trust. Disclosure is important because your own health affects your partner’s health. An HIV+ should not be engaging in anonymous sex without disclosure, because their partner should be able to make an informed decision.
Pedro is a character whose identity can only exist in secret. He lives a promiscuous life that must come to a halt upon the arrival of his nephew. This is when Pedro’s identity must now learn how to navigate in mainstream life because he is responsible for a child. When Doña Teresa tried to get custody over the nephew, she used Pedro’s HIV status against him and blackmailed him with pictures of him being promiscuous. The criminalization of gay identity and HIV status are theme throughout the readings assigned for week 10. Gay folks have had to deal with themselves internally while also having to deal with external forces that have been legally institutionalized for the purposes of decreasing the quality of life for queer folks.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I sympathize with poz people who have unprotected sex. It seems that self-destructive behaviors is common amongst queer folks. While I don’t believe that I have HIV, I won’t be certain of that until tomorrow. I’ve been taking PEP this last week, and I have no fear of having HIV. When I think about how I should be upset or frightened by the prospect of having HIV, I start to think about how I was neglected as a child. I start to think about how my parents were unresponsive to my cries for help, and then HIV moves from being a specter of fear to a status that I feel like I deserve. That is not to say that I have/will ever seek out HIV; what I mean is that the resent that I harbor for those who neglected me has also disallowed me from respecting myself. Thoughts like “why should I care about my safety when the people who were supposed to love me unconditionally failed to nurture me?” began to run through my mind when I left the house of the guy I hooked up with. The condom broke, and he said that it would be fine because he didn’t finish. I went to the restroom and I found what I thought was semen, and of course I was also bleeding. I didn’t feel fear or anger when I found out that he might have been lying. I just went home and then went to the doctors. When I see poz people having unprotected sex; I see it as them having lost the desire to have a healthy life. I feel like that the world has stepped on them so much that they have lost all respect for themselves. When I see a poz person having unprotected sex, I hope that they are able to find peace with their circumstances so that they can begin to heal.
michael gomez
DeleteAfter reading the introduction to Trevor Hoppe’s “Punishing Disease: HIV and the Criminalization of Sickness”, as well as Larry Kramer’s “Reports from the Holocaust: The Making of an AIDS Activist”, it can be seen how Pedro fits into the contexts of queer desire, sexuality and the U.S.’ history of criminalizing disease through different forms. First we can see that his engagement in anonymous sex without diclosing his status was what proposed laws/policies were targeting at the time of the AIDS epidemic, due to the fact that the seroconversion that comes from anonymous sex with a positive individual is life altering, if not a death sentence. As Hoppe states, there are “twenty-eight states with criminal statures that require people living with HIV to disclose their HIV-status to sexual partners before having sex” (8). Also we can see with Pedro how his sexuality and queer desire came under fire by Bernardo’s grandmother, with her blackmailing of Pedro since she knew his HIV status, reflecting the times in the US in which the knowledge of one’s status could be used as a weapon. Honestly, the fact that Pedro omitted his status when it came to having anonymous sex does make me unconfortable because knowing the extensive history of HIV/AIDS, why would you want to put others through a similar fate? Even if his omission was not with negative intentions, it still is not right, especially in a time in which the effects of HIV/AIDS are more known than during the time of the AIDS epidemic. Full disclosure is always best, even if it means losing an opportunity to have sex.
ReplyDeleteThrough the HIV positive protagonist, Pedro, of Miguel Albaladejo’s Bear Cub (2004), the film explores the consequences of “punitive disease control” described in Trevor Hoppe’s “Punishing Disease” that unjustly criminalizes disease as a result of stigmatization of the LGBT community. In the film, Pedro creates a strong, familial bond with his nephew after he takes him into his household. In spite of Pedro’s genuine care of his nephew, he is threatened by the grandmother to give up his guardianship rights of the boy because she claims that is HIV positive status could potentially be dangerous for young Bernardo. Doña Teresa’s attitude towards HIV and AIDs positive people mirrors the arguments made in favor of the criminalization of the HIV/ AIDS disease in the United States. In “Punishing Disease” by Trevor Hoppes, the author details how during the 80s, U.S. legislators tried to pass draconian laws that tried to control disease through “coercion and punishment” in order to ensure the protection of non-infected people. This move from criminalization of disease, described as “from sickness to badness”, had helped “facilitate punitive responses to scenarios that involve little or no risk of transmitìing the disease.” (8) This consequence of the punitive disease control was played out in Bear Cub as Doña Teresa was successfully able to gain guardianship of Bernardo because Pedro knew that the courts would rule him as unfit to be a parent because of his status. Bear Cub demonstrates how the criminalization of disease moved into circumstances where there was little to no transmission of disease; as a guardian who is fully aware of his status and sexuality, Pedro would never have exposed Bernardo to the virus.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, Albaladejo’s Bear Cub also delves in the reactions of queer desire during the AIDS crisis. Rather than seclude himself from society and victimize himself because of his status, Pedro remains an active member of society and sexually active- often taking part in anonymous sexual encounters. In this way, Pedro fits within the context of Larry Kramer’s “Reports from the Holocaust: The Making of an AIDs Activist” because much like Kramer, Pedro often struggles with intimacy and relationships after suffering from losing a beloved boyfriend to AIDS many years ago. Although Kramer refuses to have sex out of fear of transmitting the disease because he is unsure of his status, Pedro is still very sexually active and does not make himself a victim of his situation. Kramer is conflicted with about the impact of AIDS on his sexual lifestyle, as he states “I want to live and I want to love…” where as Pedro is living his life, with little concern about his status. Thus, Trevor Hoppe’s argument that freedom and privacy, not coercion and punishment, is the best way to deal with HIV/AIDS patients which allows them to live life normally and gives them space to deal with their conditions. In this instance, freedom and privacy allowed Pedro to live his life as normal, and engage in sex without facing scrutiny.
Personally, I think HIV positive people should always be honest about their status before sex- even annonymous sex. I think if the person were to participate in safe, annonymous sex that has absolute no risk of transmition then I would not see it as a big deal. However, if the other person is in any risk of also getting infected, then it would be best to be straightforward about their status.