Legal Consciousness on the Margins of Society:
Struggles Against Stigmatization in the AIDS Crisis
By Michael Musheno
This particular article proved to be an interesting study. The element I found most compelling was how both groups in the study tended to buy into the stigmatization and stereotyping that amounted due to their lifestyles and afflictions. For example, each of the female heroine users didn’t feel in any way that they were victims, and that each of them was a full-blown “junkie”, despite the fact that only one of them actually exhibited uses practices that would characterize them that way. Likewise, with the HIV-positive men in the study, they found themselves blaming their lifestyle and agreed with society’s common misconception that AIDS was a gay disease and it was their own fault for contracting it.
In both cases, the individuals were subject to labeling theory. Essentially, they found themselves buying into the insults and names they were being called so that they themselves believed that’s what they were. This theory has come up during my studies of crime and juvenile delinquency. Essentially, certain groups of people are labeled in a negative way that identifies them as being bad or being lower than others. Part of the theory is also the idea of a self-fulfilling prophecy, in which due to the labels, an individual actually becomes what he or she is being called.
In this reading, we see this type of labeling being used against both the heroine users and the gay HIV-positive men. The women are junkies, and the men live a lifestyle that is risky and wrong, and is largely to blame for their condition. Both groups find themselves believing the labels and even starting to think that they deserve to have HIV. I find myself curious as to the fate of the female heroine users. At the time, only one of them exhibited the characteristics of a junkie, yet all of them labeled themselves this way. After the support and treatment group was disbanded, I wonder how many of them actually progressed into full-blown addiction due to their labeling.
Struggles Against Stigmatization in the AIDS Crisis
By Michael Musheno
This particular article proved to be an interesting study. The element I found most compelling was how both groups in the study tended to buy into the stigmatization and stereotyping that amounted due to their lifestyles and afflictions. For example, each of the female heroine users didn’t feel in any way that they were victims, and that each of them was a full-blown “junkie”, despite the fact that only one of them actually exhibited uses practices that would characterize them that way. Likewise, with the HIV-positive men in the study, they found themselves blaming their lifestyle and agreed with society’s common misconception that AIDS was a gay disease and it was their own fault for contracting it.
In both cases, the individuals were subject to labeling theory. Essentially, they found themselves buying into the insults and names they were being called so that they themselves believed that’s what they were. This theory has come up during my studies of crime and juvenile delinquency. Essentially, certain groups of people are labeled in a negative way that identifies them as being bad or being lower than others. Part of the theory is also the idea of a self-fulfilling prophecy, in which due to the labels, an individual actually becomes what he or she is being called.
In this reading, we see this type of labeling being used against both the heroine users and the gay HIV-positive men. The women are junkies, and the men live a lifestyle that is risky and wrong, and is largely to blame for their condition. Both groups find themselves believing the labels and even starting to think that they deserve to have HIV. I find myself curious as to the fate of the female heroine users. At the time, only one of them exhibited the characteristics of a junkie, yet all of them labeled themselves this way. After the support and treatment group was disbanded, I wonder how many of them actually progressed into full-blown addiction due to their labeling.
Posts
These are interesting points, Caveman! This course in law is making me wish that I took more classes about crime and delinquency. Anyway, this is what I struggle with in the study of sociology: how do we make people understand that the fault isn't theirs? We are so quick to blame ourselves, that we tend to lose our self identity. How do we fix this? Sociology classes in junior high? Or...journalists who write about the definition of "junkie" and the ACTUAL causes of AIDS (not always homosexual)? Well - that won't happen because a vast audience isn't interested in those topics. I think this is one of the biggest issues we face today - and it's our own fault - but we must work on a way to STOP legitimizing erroneous labels and assumptions.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article, I also felt that labeling theory could be used to explain both male and female self-blame and destruction of self. I also feel that Americans are more likely to blame themselves for their position in society, simply due to the fact that culturally there is an abhorrence to unsuccessful people. These unsuccessful people are seen as failures who made "bad" decisions, rather than people down on their luck or people lacking the capital to make positive/good decisions. So, not only are IDU's labeled as "junkies" they are labeled as failures and ostracized from their communities and work place. It's a disastrous way to handle citizens who are in need of support and medical care.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both the comments you have posted. Yes, we are brought up in a society that is very quick to recognize the individual over it's overall self. This is,indeed, the easy way out. It keeps us from dealing with the bigger picture, and it's much easier to say, "Oh, she's got HIV because she's a junkie and that's bad," instead of. "Yeah, she has HIV and has a serious drug problem that was likely influenced by her position in society, determined largely by class, gender and a number of other influences. Yes, she made the decision to use, but not necessarily to keep using, especially when the system that is designed to help her seek treatment is flawed and actually causes more problems than it solves." See? The 2nd sentence is a lot more complicated to think about and deal with than the first.
ReplyDeleteYou're both quite right in your comments that this is the type of mentality that exists within our culture which leads to such problems as labeling and self-fulfilling prophecies, and it is one that we need to start addressing from the bottom up. We place so much emphasis on the individual. It makes me think of Horatio Alger's "The Amercian Dream" (I think that's the title), which is the classic rags-riches story in which anyone who is determined to make it in America can and will. That is what a lot of people still believe, and honestly, it just isn't true. And when people fail, they tend to blame themselves for inadequacies and laziness rather than realizing the odds are stacked against them, depending on their place in society.
Taking individual responsibility and being autonomous can be both so empowering and also utterly restraining and defeatist. Freedom of choice can have monumental and effecting effects, people can change the world, do what they want, they have freedom! But when an individual makes a poor choice, regardless of scale, they are the only one's to blame. It can be a double-edged sword. Those who got AIDS, of course, blame themselves, and I completely understand and relate to that. There aren't many other people to even attempt to point the finger at. It's your body, your prerogative, your choice of partner, your misfortune, your future, your life, your addiction... it goes on and on. It was a bit upsetting that these individuals almost verified and excused their oppression. That was of great shock, they legitimate their mistreatment, and give off an impression that they would do the same thing in the other position. !!!
ReplyDelete