The reality today, despite marked by great diversity of ideas and ideals, still sees grappling with trying to single thought maintenance to justify political and institutional ideologies of the dominant sectors of society. This violent attempt, for every single thought disregards the diversity emerges legitimized by the dominant rationality anchored in the existence of values to ensure the so-called "natural order" of the world. This fact affects the field of human relations to combine public and private responsibilities, state autonomy versus autonomy of the subject and the clash between heteronomies at stake.
The articles published by the media in this last day 01 December, World Day of Fight against HIV-AIDS, demonstrated one of the most perverse aspects of the single thought dictatorship. The news programs, mostly, attributed the growing number of new HIV infections among young Brazilians because the new generation Z have not witnessed the loss and suffering of public figures as Cazuza, Freddie Mercury and Renato Russo. This statement sounded like mantra all day 01 / 12 / 2014 because the media for the lack of human drama lived at the beginning of the epidemic drives the "carelessness" and "neglect" of a believing community that HIV-AIDS is "thing of the past and after all, the sickness is not that serious."
By insisting on this side of the coin, is assigned responsibility for the spread of the epidemic to individual liberty of the subject and the group to which it belongs and relates. However, there to illuminate and discuss the multifaceted other side of the coin and highlight the scope of such responsibility to extrapolate the instance of the individual or of a certain group. Apart from individual responsibility and ownership group, one wonders how is in Brazil the quality of sex education worked and discussed by public and private schools. Speaking of institutions is also important to explore how the churches (un) educate the faithful in tangent to the experience of gender and exercise of sexuality. Or: what actions and effective campaigns, beyond the day 1º December and Carnival, the Government has encouraged over the years to meet the increase in infections? What civil society has done for the fight against machismo and sexism? As our families face, propagate or reproduce homophobia and sexism?
Homophobia leads to the marginalization of sexual experiences and also restricts the possibilities of exercising affection in public areas, relegating the homoafetivo relationship underground. The place of hiding presents more conducive to expose the subject to greater vulnerabilities, the focus directly under the new infections. In this big picture, to date many women give in to sex without proper prevention by hard or even impossible to negotiate with their partners to use condoms. Remains taboo to discuss prevention within marriage or stable relationships, because it is part of the indisputable premise that fidelity reigns in married life. As much as the experience of open relationships is growing, especially among the youth, society as a whole remains alien to the discussion of the issue. Has also walked well outside the role of recreational drugs in virus proliferation by restricting the freedom and autonomy of the subject. Little has been discussed about the new forms of sexuality and exercise variations, the increasingly early initiation of sexual life, the ease with which today's young people are allowed to transit spaces fluids by the multiplicity of partners and sexual and affective experiences.
Finally, it is proposed the question, this complexity can be briefly exposed condensed in the formula "our young people did not see their idols die of AIDS victims"? In addition to the youth responsibility, why not throw spotlight on family responsibility, institutional, civil society, the STD AIDS and viral hepatitis Department and the Government? Apparently, it seems that lazy and uncompromising attitude of disproportionately transfer responsibility of an avoidable harm to the weakest part of the relationship has been the choice easier and feasible, instead of working the passage more difficult, but necessary and liberating, for the universal awareness of the responsibilities and coping with the epidemic.