
In Memory of Jesse Helms and the Condom on His House (2008) - GuiA
https://www.poz.com/blog/in-memory-of-je
======
olivermarks
It's easy to forget, because of the light hearted tone of the essay, that this
was actually an incredibly brave thing to do at that time.

~~~
kalleboo
Yeah it could have easily gone horribly wrong.

But I was still surprised by how lightly the police took it and how easily
they got off (a parking ticket). It feels like if the same thing happened with
the SWAT-and-terrorism-horny law enforcement we have today, they would be
locked up under some vague national security charge and not just be allowed to
drive off.

------
morley
What a great story. I really like the use of humor to defang. To me, that
feels a lot more effective than wrath or spite.

~~~
Theodores
Yes, I had not thought of it that way even though it has been obvious since
school days. The pertinent quote is worth remembering because it covered all
the bases and was so well explained:

"One of the best tools an activist can use is humor. If you can get folks
laughing at your target’s expense, you diminish his power. I wanted the
country to have a good laugh at Helms’ expense. I wanted his fellow senators
to have a little chuckle behind his back. And I wanted Senator Helms to
realize that his free ride was up - if he hit us again, we’d hit back."

The article was written after the event, I wonder how well thought out some of
the nuances were before the event, e.g. the fellow senators having a chuckle
behind his back or that power is diminished.

------
chimeracoder
Ironically, to this day, condoms are not (and have never been) formally tested
for their efficacy in use by gay men, either in the US or Europe. The
standards for producing condoms set by the relevant regulatory bodies are only
designed for vaginal sex. Jesse Helms's work is a big reason for that, so his
"legacy" sadly lives on today.

Condoms remain the second-best means of preventing HIV transmission through
sexual activity, and it's heartbreaking to think of how many more lives could
have been saved without these bigoted policies.

~~~
wnoise
Second best? Are you considering PrEP? Because that has the significant
downside of being very expensive, as well as a few side effects, some of which
can be significant.

Abstaining has the significant downside of not having sex.

~~~
chimeracoder
> Second best? Are you considering PrEP? Because that has the significant
> downside of being very expensive

PrEP is not very expensive. In th US, in fact, almost everyone is able to get
it for free.

> as well as a few side effects, some of which can be significant

The side effects are incredibly rare, except for people just starting a
regime, when they may experience mild symptoms.

> Abstaining has the significant downside of not having sex

Abstinence isn't considered a means of prevention because telling people "be
abstinent" doesn't work. We have the data to prove it.

~~~
wahern

      > Abstinence isn't considered a means of prevention because telling people "be abstinent" doesn't work. We have the data to prove it.
    

Huh? There _is_ evidence that abstinence-only works better than nothing. See,
e.g.,
[https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/...](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/382798)

    
    
      The model-estimated probability of ever having sexual
      intercourse by the 24-month follow-up was 33.5% in the
      abstinence-only intervention and 48.5% in the control group.
      Fewer abstinence-only intervention participants (20.6%) than
      control participants (29.0%) reported having coitus in the
      previous 3 months during the follow-up period (RR, 0.94; 95%
      CI, 0.90-0.99).
    

And condoms have a failure rate, too, both in actual use and in adherence.

Abstinence-only sucks because it has _comparatively_ poor efficacy, and
because teaching abstinence is not mutually exclusive with other approaches.

There is no pre-programmed amount of sex people have to have. Promiscuity in
the U.S. is dramatically lower today than it was 30 or 40 years ago.

------
seba_dos1
When you'll trace this word back to its origins, this is an amazing hack :)
I'm glad that someone thought about posting it here.

~~~
PhasmaFelis
Which word?

~~~
greglindahl
Helms.

------
CapitalistCartr
I remember my first friends that posted a sign on their front door requesting
people not smoke in their house. Then, I thought it so very bold.

I remember when the police thought beating up gays laughable, and my dad
sneering, "Queer as a three-dollar bill." Now, I just attended the local Pride
parade and the police were having a great time as participants.

We can look in the past at these changes, but people had to live their whole
lives like that. Not really citizens, not really people. Anita Bryant was
actually popular in my State.

~~~
mherdeg
Any guesses on what's next? What do you suppose, in retrospect 30 years from
now, will seem crazy that we all did?

~~~
steve_g
I wonder what future generations will _despise_ us for. For which behaviors or
beliefs will they take down our statues, remove our portraits from display,
take our names off memorials, and revile us as evil?

~~~
aplummer
Maybe how we treat refugees, or watch Syrians being bombed on the news before
carrying on with our day.

------
poster123
From the article: 'He once said, referring to homosexuals, “it’s their
deliberate, disgusting, revolting conduct that is responsible for the
disease.”'

The sexual practices of male homosexuals are the reason they have a much
higher prevalence of AIDS. If we can discourage cigarette smoking because it
causes lung cancer, why can't we discourage the behaviors that spread AIDS?

~~~
dang
It looks like you've been using HN primarily for ideological battle. Please
don't use HN this way. It's against the site rules and destructive of what the
site exists for, so we ban accounts that do it, as
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
says.

~~~
1951362362
Why is every conservative leaning post ideological battle, but every couple
days we have 20+ comments yelling about UBI, that somehow isn't ideological
battle?

~~~
dang
It's inevitably a judgment call because there is overlap between political
topics and good HN material. If someone is name-calling, yelling, or ranting,
that's more likely ideological battle. If someone is substantively discussing
UBI, that may be a bit of a tired theme, but it obviously isn't necessarily
battle mode.

> _Why is every conservative leaning post_

It isn't. It just feels that way to you because of the hostile media effect
([https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22hostile%20media%20effect%22...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22hostile%20media%20effect%22&sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comment&storyText=false&prefix=false&page=0)).
Everyone always feels like their favorite point of view is censored or
suppressed.

------
dsfyu404ed
>Besides opening the rented ladder in the motel parking lot, we never did an
actual walk-through as practice.

Impressive.

