SECBH%CUNYVM.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu (06/28/91)
"Gerri Oppedisano" <gerri@watson.ibm.com> writes: >Now, wait one minute and let's be a little bit realistic. I think What I think is that you should take more than one minute and go back and carefully re-read the my article as it was posted. The bulk of what you evidently intended as a response and comment on my article is not based on anything I wrote. Furthermore, you have garbled the facts about the Newsweek article as I gave them so that they have no bearing whatsover on what I wrote or what is in Newsweek. That you might disagree with what I wrote and the opinions and attitudes I have is fine with me, and fine that you express them in this group. What you wrote is not fine in that for the most part is not based on what I wrote and you worked yourself into a fit of anger and denunciation conjured out of thin air. >................ and it doesn't surprise me in the least >that Ms B feels more victimized than the person who contracted >AIDS from engaging in the activities that are much more commonly >tied to AIDS and HIV. My criticism of Ms. Bergalis specifically excepted the letter she wrote, and it is in that letter that she expresses her anger about the mode of transmission. Please, re-read what I wrote. >For a while there was a big Political Correctness debate here talking >about how there should not be any utterance of a High Risk Group, I did not participate in that discussion and have never felt the need of a PC checklist. I am quite capable of discussing AIDS, having cared for and worked for people with AIDS for near a decade, without the assistance of a PC checklist. I have my own mind, thank you. My reaction to the Newsweek article has nothing to do with PC considerations. >Going to the hospital to get your baby delivered >is not considered a high risk activity. Barely anyone is prepared to accept contracting AIDS from this, and I don't understand your feeling that people should.. You want people NOT to be hysterical? ...........(remaining totally garbled material about Dr. Benson deleted) You have completely, but completely garbled what I wrote about Dr. Benson. Furthermore, I expressed no opinion whatsover about the correctness of his actions. I did NOT censure the mother of the infant for her fears. Your comments COMPLETELY misrepresent what I wrote and attribute opinions to me which I did not express and do not hold. Re-read my article,please. >.......... I think if you expect people to be prepared for contracting AIDS >no matter what they do and under almost any circumstance >you're being very unrealistic, and I also think you are >the one who is being self righteous. I said nothing whatsoever that should have led you to make the above statement. I have to say that it seems quite clear to me that you got the general drift of the subject matter and that I had very negative opinions about some of it, and from that point reacted with no attention to the details whatsoever. Re-read my posting, please. >I didn't see the Newsweek article and perhaps it was written >in such a way as to make people angry or paranoid, which I don't think >is right, however this woman Ms B is angry and Newsweek >is printing her viewpoint. People are free to interpret the situation >any way they want. It's a free coountry.. freedom of speech, >expression etc.. Why do you feel so free to your opinion and at the >same time denying Ms. B hers? Ms. Oppedisano, take a tranquilizer! Ms. Bergalis can say what she damned well pleases, and has. And, I am quite free to comment on it, and have. Where did I suggest that she should not have been allowed to speak or that her comments should not have been printed? Re-read my article, please. My main points are: 1. Considering the volatile nature of this topic (as we see from your response) Newsweek has dramatized the frightening and depressing material in a manner that quite overshadows its rather tepid presentation of the all the factors involved in this very complicated issue. I say this article will encourage hysteria and not do anything whatsoever to advance intelligent discussion and policy making. 2. Like it or not, I DO feel that Ms. Bergalis' naive reactions to her current physical condition and Newsweek's playing up those reactions warrant no sympathy. Ms. Bergalis has had every opportunity to know what AIDS is about in the past ten years. This epidemic has been ravaging the world for a decade. Get real Ms. O, this disease is affecting thousands upon thousand of non-IV drug using heterosexual men and women. Every American with a TV set has had the opportunity to see het women, het men, children, infants and hemophiliacs who are dying of AIDS, as well as gay men and drug users. I can choose not to watch TV programs about this catastrophe, I can say it is not my problem, I can say it is "their" business or I can quite frankly not give a damn. But when I find out that I have AIDS - mode of transmission irrelevant - should I be surprised that death by AIDS is horrible and ugly, and not a diaphanous fading away to the churning of the Montevani Strings? Should the whole world be surprised that this is not Sleeping Beauty? I hardly think so. To quote someone we both know, "...let's be a little realistic." Jack Carroll -------------------------------------------------------------------------