I am writing in response to your article on Distasteful posters turn students off by Amanda Zhang. I feel that the article did not address the central issue of these posters. In my opinion, the posters are more than distasteful, as Mike Lim have noted, “The posters exploit stereotypes. Not everyone contracts aids through the scenarios portrayed in the posters".

I do not think that it is right to attempt to raise awareness of a social problem using another social problem as a backdrop to their message. In saying this, i am referring to stereotypical attitudes towards females, homosexuals and the sexually active. By invoking such stereotypes in order to address the social issue of Aids, these posters have in fact made it more difficult for victims of Aids to voice out in society.

A proper Aids campaign should seek no only to inform the masses about the dangers of Aids but also to enable those who are afflicted with Aids to receive proper treatment and care. These posters will enforce the continued labeling of Aids as a form of 'divine' punishment for people engaging in sexual activities.

Moreover, one of the posters placed a woman in a degrading position of giving oral sex to another man. While this poster might be passed off as an example of promiscuity, the patriarchal overtones is strong. Why is the woman placed in a dominated sexual position? Another poster also depicted homosexual overtones by having Men grope each other. Aids do not particularly afflict homosexuals.

By continuing the label that Aids is synonymous with Homosexuality, are we regressing into stereotypes? What more does this say about us in an intellectual climate like NUS whereby all such racial, gender bias should be eradicated? What does this say about us being willing to accept such stereotypical images of Homosexuality and Aids? Is it also fair to inform Aids as a sexual problem? What about children born by infected parents? What about those infected through the sharing of needles? Do the posters thus do more damage than its self proclaimed moral stance of attempting to make people "think twice before having casual sex"?

I feel that the posters will do more harm than good and the creators of the posters should publicly apologize for their insensitivity against females and homosexuals. Moreover, the creators should also apologize to the general public for creating a moral panic. While sexual experimentation and promiscuity should be done with caution, we shouldn’t impose moral attitudes unto people who do. Doing so will lead to a slippery slope argument. When then should we stop? What is considered immoral? Would holding hands in public be immoral?

Joshua Sim
FASS