Sociological Perception of AIDs - Essay Example

Section/# Sociological Perception of AIDs One of the most difficult constructs to change is sociological constructs. Due to the fact that these constructs are oftentimes not the result of a single piece of misinterpreted information but rather a set of reinforced beliefs combined with misunderstood/misinterpreted or otherwise warped information, certain sociological perceptions can persist and pervade the definition of key terms for even longer than is necessitated for them to be proven false. Such a sociological perception is exhibited in nearly every aspect of our modern world. Due to the fact that more and more people are integrated into the information exchange via the means of mass media and other factors, the level and extent to which these sociological perceptions define the modern world has only exponentially grown over the past several years. The purpose of this essay will be to make careful note of the ways in which sociological constructs have helped to define and ms-represent the issue of AIDs to the global community over the past 30 years. Furthermore, the analysis will consider the key means that will be necessary to reverse the seemingly intractable inference that such sociological perceptions have affected on the population. Firstly, in order to under sociological perception, one must seek to broadly quantify the levels of inference that society as a whole has attributed to the AIDs virus. Naturally, when AIDs first came to prominence, it was understandable that many individuals would have an incomplete and rather parochial definition of how the virus affected people (Howard-Paynea et al 2009, p. 593). However, the most negative aspect of sociological perception is the fact that oftentimes, regardless of the revelation of new and important information, these sociological concepts remained seemingly unchanged; moreover, they are willfully recalcitrant to broaden any prior understanding as they have seemingly been accepted as summarily true by the many individuals who have already incorporated such an understanding into their worldview. This can of course especially be seen as a function of how many people originally identified AIDs with the homosexual male communities in which it was most prevalent. Due to the fact that the news and media greeted their respective populations with such imagery, the information shareholders accepted this wholesale as being the solitary determinant of the spread of AIDs (Barrett et al 2010, p. 35). Most obviously, such a narrow-minded understanding of the virus contributed to a very shallow and incomplete understanding of both the means of transfer as well as the possible demographic groups that would be affected by it. By identifying AIDs with the homosexual male community, the extent to which the virus could be exhibited among other individual in different sexual orientations and demographics was successfully warped. It is important to note that although such an incorrect sociological interpretation and/or perception is inherently flawed, it is unlikely that such a perception was molded by any inherent attempt to misrepresent the information in the first place; rather, it is merely the result of the fact that human beings attempt to classify and categorize any and all information that they might come in contact with in convenient, simplistic, and understandable terms that are not always amenable to adequately explaining the full scope of a given issue. This topic in and of itself bears further analysis as the oversimplification of information oftentimes leads to individuals being led to believe a certain way even if no clear informational linkages can be made to solidify and/or compound such a view. However, this is not the result of the means by which mass media or culture has an effect on the human’s ability to reason, draw inference, and create a sense of logic from a situation; rather, it is the fundamental nature of humankind to reduce all information into easily recalled and simplistic data patterns that oftentimes reduce infinitely complex issues into something that is almost unrecognizable and otherwise illogical (Grimshaw 1995, p. 9). In effect, the desire of the individual to incorporate key understandings and inference that has been gained through a litany of sources and condense these into a convenient definition of such an issue is what lies at the core of nearly all sociological perceptions. As a result of this fact, unclear and illogical inference is often generated and leads to highly flawed over-arching sociological definitions and perceptions. A further example of a sociological perception that has fundamentally altered the understanding and perception of the AIDs virus is the means of conveyance. Due to the fact that AIDs had such a highly negative stigma as an STD that was primarily associated with the homosexual male communities of California in its earliest manifestations, a further sociological perception that was wrought upon society as a whole was a total misunderstanding of the means by which the virus spreads. This one particular aspect of sociological perception helps to bring the reader face to face with the power and seemingly immutable nature that sociological perceptions exist. Even as the medical community and mass media struggled to engage the populace on nearly every front and educate them with respect to the biological factors that affected the spread of the disease, a pervasive misunderstanding pervaded society; and to a large extent continues to dilute a further and more complete understanding of means of conveyance for such a virus. Naturally, such a misunderstanding has led to societal perceptions that continue to pervade the view of the disease more than 40 years after it first appeared within the community listed above. In this way, the reader is able to gain a valuable insight into the ways in which societal interpretations can be nearly immovable once they are categorically put in place by given shareholders. The effect of such an incomplete and outright wrong understanding of the disease has led many to wrongly conclude that there is little to any danger in acquiring the disease as long as one does not have any exposure to the homosexual community. Similarly, such an understanding has so exponentially limited many individuals understanding of the disease that they have been led to form perceptions that a higher percentage of homosexual males exhibit the disease than do heterosexuals (Bovina 2009, p. 94). Although such an interpretation could have been correct in the very preliminary stages of the disease’s prevalence on the global stage, the fact of the matter is that currently, a higher number of heterosexual individuals exhibit the disease. Due to the fact that once the disease was introduced to the general population such determinants were of little to no use, many individuals have consequently had a difficult time in re-orienting their understandings of AIDs as a disease that can strike at any point within society regardless of sexual orientation, drug use, or other determinate factors that sociological perceptions continue to dictate. As a result of such a sociological perception, key shareholders around the world were fundamentally convinced that AIDs could be acquired through a diverse range of harmless activities to include: holding hands, kissing, or touching something that an infected patient had touched. Obviously, such broad and inherently incorrect theories with regards to the spread of the disease did nothing to enhance the public’s understanding and perception of means by which it could be avoided and only served to instill a type of panic with relation to those individuals within the community that might have been infected by the virus (Dibb et al 2012, p. 144). Moreover, such an incorrect sociological percept meant that in addition to a fundamental lack of understanding of the biological means by which the disease was transmitted, many of those within society that suffered from AIDs were further ostracized due to the fact that many individuals within society believed that they could somehow become infected via simple means and that therefore those with AIDs must be kept at arm’s length and treated as a type of pariah with which society must not engage for fear of contamination/illness (Baah-Odoom 2012, p. 4433). Moreover, a further type of sociological perception that surrounded, and still continues to a large extent, the understanding of AIDs relates to the means by which the virus was treatable. In the very earliest days of the disease manifestation in society, the receipt of an AIDs diagnosis was tantamount to a death certificate. Although some individuals lived longer than others, surviving longer than a few years with the disease was practically unheard of (Hoy-Ellis et al 2007, p. 836). As the individuals that first received the disease as it was exhibited to the world rapidly wasted away, a general sociological perception of hopelessness and futility were ascribed to the way in which an AIDs diagnosis was viewed. However, as the previous sociological perceptions have illustrated this particular one was also not beneficial in seeking to define the means by which the disease could be further understood, described, and respected. This particular sociological perception of course ties back in with the means of conveyance that has previously been discussed as well as the overall prognosis of the disease which has also been warped by the very same sociological perceptions that have helped to alter the aforementioned understandings of the disease. One of the ways that society has attempted to grapple with the overall prognosis of the AIDs virus and the veritable death sentence that those which suffer from it must accept is to consciously marginalize the overall number of cases that exist within the community in question. As opposed to the previous sociological perceptions that have thus far been discussed, this particular action is taken more out of a desire to protect oneself and one’s community from the realization that AIDs presents a very real and present danger than as a function of merely misinterpreting information and drawing faulty inference from such information. As opposed to some of the other factors that have thus far been discussed as a function of sociological perception, this one in particular has actually helped to incorporate a healthful element of fear; albeit rather untrue. Regardless, the point remains that currently AIDs is treatable to an extent that even 10 years ago would have been deemed unimaginable. Although a cure is still elusive to medical researchers, a careful cocktail of retroviral drugs administered to the patient ca ensure that a much longer lifespan is affected than what was originally witnessed within individuals that were originally diagnosed with the disease. As a function of this, the sociological perception attributed to the overall extent and existence of the AIDs virus is fundamentally altered by the fact that prevailing biases exist with relation to the geographical prevalence of the disease in the Western/developed world. Oftentimes, when one considers the extent of the AIDs virus, it is both known and understood that it necessarily exists in the West and within the highly developed countries and economies; however, a rapid successive jump is immediately made to the developing and third world nations as a way to conveniently disregard the prevalence and extent to which the disease is affecting the native population in question. Such a defense mechanism is necessarily dangerous due to the fact that it does not allow the participants in the process to develop a nuanced and complete understanding of the disease as it truly exists; rather, the only type of inference that is drawn is the incorrect fact that AIDs disproportionately affects individuals in far off locations to a greater degree and extent that it might within one’s own community (Anderson et al 2010, p. 1494). This sociological perception of the AIDs virus is the incorrect belief and understanding that is oftentimes developed that lays groundwork for understanding the virus as something of an exotic disease that invariably affects those in the developing world to a higher degree and extent than it does so in the more developed world. Naturally, although the actual incidence of AIDs in the developed world may be statistically reduced, it does not however reduce the danger of the disease to the overall health and well-being of the individual infected. By continually minimizing the prevalence of HIV/AIDs within a given geography or assuming that the incidence rate is so low as to be trivial, such a sociological perception harms both the understanding of the disease and the general outlook for remediation among the populace. Lastly, with regards to the extent to which the AIDs virus is represented within our own society, this is a sociological perception that incorporates nearly all of the previously mentioned conventions that have thus far been discussed. As a matter of convenience and easy denotation, AIDs is primarily thought of as present, albeit widely relegated to the communities of drug users, homosexuals, and others who are oftentimes incorrectly viewed as operating on what some may deem as the fringes of society; however, such a sociological construct has been reinforced by countless individuals, friends, family members, and others as it has been passed along. In this way, the true nature and danger posed by the AIDs virus is minimized at the overall expense of conveniently creating a false construct within which the disease, and those afflicted by it, can be categorized. Such an understanding necessarily limits the extent to which the individual shareholder is willing to cope with understand and empathize with those afflicted with the virus within their own community. As such, this final sociological perception, perhaps more so than any other, works to relay a sense of calm and relief to the shareholder; convincing them that although the problem exists, it is somehow relegated to regions and individuals outside of the scope of those that they interact with on a daily basis. Such a sociological perception has the direct effect of calming those within its sway as it seeks to relate the true nature of the threat of AIDs by a means of understanding that is something other than the true nature and scope of the disease (Lindstrom et al 2011, p. 52). As a means of correcting many if not all of the negative sociological perceptions that have thus far been listed, it will be incumbent upon governments, NGOs, private organizations, the media, and individuals to incessantly work to change perception surrounding HIV/AIDs. Due to the fact that these beliefs and understandings are oftentimes deeply ingrained within the character and/or religious beliefs of the practitioner, it oftentimes takes a period of years in order to work to undermine the fallacies that have herein been presented. Understanding that this process is something that takes a great deal of time to overcome is the first step in crafting an adequate, patient, and measured response in dealing with it. The degree to which such a policy or approach to the issue will need to engage society will need to be both long-suffering and patient. Regardless of the fact that scientific data as well as logic point to an obvious conclusion, those that seek to buy shareholder support for a wider understanding will need to be ever mindful of the fact that such a program will not begin to yield fruit in a short period of time. As previously stated, the level to which shareholders will be recalcitrant to change their views and interpretations/perceptions on the given topic will require that those who attempt to engage these perceptions will need to employ plans and objectives that have far-reaching and long-term plans to engage and redirect the focus of society at large with regards to the specific issues that have been enumerated upon within this paper. Each one of these sociological perceptions that have been discussed within this analysis are shared by and espoused by countless millions around the globe. Unlike a world view, the differing cultures around the globe have, at least in some small part, bought into various understandings that have herein been presented. Moreover, for the most part, societal misrepresentations of the disease have meant that a further understanding of, and empathy for those individuals that suffer from the disease, has been almost invariably reduced. This fact alone is perhaps the most powerful in representing the negative nature and effects of the societal mis-representations that have been enumerated upon and discussed within this brief analysis. Likewise, as has been evidenced, the amount of time and money that is necessary to be spent in order to attempt to reverse many of these sociological perceptions comes at a staggeringly high cost. Oftentimes, even if the information is correctly transmitted and reaches the individual who holds an incorrect perception, it is still powerless to change such a perception. In this way, the level to which change can be effected is oftentimes limited; however, as this paper has demonstrated, a further understanding of the scope and range of incorrect beliefs surrounding sociological perceptions of it only serves to help in acquainting the reader with the ways in which knowledge of HIV/AIDS exists within the current world and/or society. References Anderson, M, Elam, G, Gerver, S, Solarin, I, Fenton, K, & Easterbrook, P 2010, ''It took a piece of me': initial responses to a positive HIV diagnosis by Caribbean people in the UK', AIDS Care, 22, 12, pp. 1493-1498, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, EBSCOhost, viewed 6 December 2012. Baah-Odoom, D 2012, 'The Social Representations of HIV/AIDS and Condom Use among Male Pupils in Selected School in UK', Gender & Behaviour, 10, 1, pp. 4433-4442, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 6 December 2012. Barrett, H, & Mulugeta, B 2010, 'HIV/AIDS and reaching migrant communities', Practice Nurse, 39, 11, pp. 34-36, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, EBSCOhost, viewed 6 December 2012. Bovina, I 2009, '"Not I"—"Others": Young People's Social Perception of AIDS Patients', Social Sciences, 40, 2, pp. 91-101, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 6 December 2012. Dibb, B, & Kamalesh, T 2012, 'Exploring positive adjustment in HIV positive African women living in the UK', AIDS Care, 24, 2, pp. 143-148, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, EBSCOhost, viewed 6 December 2012. Grimshaw, J 1995, 'Plenary talk: 'life' for a non-progressor... AIDS' Impact: 2nd International Conference on Biopsychosocial Aspects of HIV & Aids, Brighton, UK, 7-10 July 1994', AIDS Care, 7, pp. S5-9, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, EBSCOhost, viewed 6 December 2012. Howard-Paynea, L, & Kiguwa, P 2008, 'The Value of Social Representations Theory in Understanding Perception Regarding HIV/AIDS', Journal Of Psychology In Africa, 18, 4, pp. 591-596, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 6 December 2012. Hoy-Ellis, C, & Fredriksen-Goldsen, K 2007, 'Is AIDS chronic or terminal? The perceptions of persons living with AIDS and their informal support partners', AIDS Care, 19, 7, pp. 835-843, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 6 December 2012. Lindstrom, J, & Henson, S 2011, 'Reimagining Development in the UK? Findings from the UK Public Opinion Monitor', IDS Bulletin, 42, 5, pp. 52-57, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 6 December 2012. Read More