Feminization of HIV/AIDS

UNAIDS in conjunction with IUB held a seminar on the Feminization of HIV/AIDS. Unfortunately, the seminar failed to deliever Bangladesh's version, if any, of feminization of HIV/AIDS. However, some important points were raised about contraception and protection in sexual intercourse by Bangladeshi partners.

Firstly, condoms are rarely used as forms of protection during sex. Instead, birth control pills are used to protect females from impregnanting. This raises the question that condoms in our society are still regarded as a form of preventing unwarranted pregnancies and NOT as a form of protection from acquiring and/or infecting STDs. The message that condoms are essential in protecting ourselves from diseases is not being widely and properly disseminated through society. As long as condoms aren't being used alongside with birth control pills, uninformed partners will continue to catch and pass along infectious diseases unwittingly.

Secondly, the gender demarcations in our society leave informed females powerless to persuade their male partners to wear condoms. Again, the power bestowed upon males makes them the lead decision-maker in sexual pursuits as well. In several cases, females (some of them living with HIV/AIDS) state their partners' (husbands, boyfriends, clients) refusal to use condoms caused them to become infected.

Thirdly, men's refusal to use condoms brings the danger of STDs closer to home. Again cases have shown that men, unknowingly, who have multiple sexual relations beyond their marriages/relationships tend to infect their wives/girlfriends with STDs by their refusal to use condoms. Undoubtedly this form of ignorant and irresponsible behaviour increases the chances of infectious sexual diseases rapidly plaguing the population.

Unfortunately, the UNAIDS report presented the problems but gave no precise solutions. One urgent message would be to effectiively disseminate the use of condoms throughout the social sphere. That is, ensure the message of promoting condom usage reaches males and females in grass-roots level. The usage of condoms alone will have an impact in lessening the flow of STDs in our society.

My Story Published

http://www.thedailystar.net/magazine/2009/06/04/fiction.htm

France and Burkha

President Sarkozy's proposal to ban the burkha in France as a sign of opression against Muslim females as to be one of the worst forms of discrimination agsint free choice.

Many Muslim females choose to dorn the burkha as a sign of their total submission to the will of Allah. Rarely, is the burkha forced upon the females. Yes, I am sure if one is to nitpick one may locate certain cases where females may state that they had no choice and were forced to accept the burkha by their husbands/families etc. But again, most females choose to wear the burkha.

So, it is indeed a sad sight to see a nation that gave birth to the principles of equality and fraternity consider robbing their Muslim female citizens of their volition. Why should the burkha be banned? What about the Muslim women who wish to wear the burkha? Who will protect their rights to do as they wish? Who will aid them in protesting against their suppression of free choice?I don't choose to wear the burkha but I wouldn't like my government telling me I can't wear it? What about my right to make my own decision?

Sarkozy is highly misinformed if he claims the burkha is a sign of oppression for Muslim females. The burkha is worn by females who choose to adorn it as their sign of total submission. Not as an obligation to their religion.

IRAN and Us

The past week has seen a massive crackdown on the demonstrators at Iran. Images of the Basij (paramilitray) force indiscriminately beating and trampling on the protestors epitomize the suppression of a democratic movement.

The demonstrations against the alleged election fraud was heralded by the international community as a long overdue national call for reforms in a theocratic regime. Watching thousands of thousands of Iranian nationals take to the streets protesting seeking new elections hit home for the viewers worldwide. In unity, we empthasized with the Iranians, watched in horror at the brutal retaliation from the government, and sympathzied with the countless martyrs that were killed for their beliefs and rights.

Faced with the massive throngs of people clamoring for their votes/voices to be heard, the regime obstinately stood by their decision to NOT nullify the election results that re-elected Ahmednijad. One would think that a theocratic regime that was borne of a revolution of young Iranians against the blatant corruption of the Shah's regime would think twice before disregarding the populace's stance. Yet the supreme leader, Khamenei, repeatedly condemned further demonstrations by the people as anti-government activites that would be harshly punished. As a result, mass demonstrations that took place after Khamenei's speech was met with brute force by the Basij.

It is inspiring to see so many young Iranian females clad in their hijabs and jeans march determinedly in the processions, screaming and shouting for their voices with the masses, refusing to give in when beaten by the Basij, and aiding the male comrades to fight back against the government's crackdown. Their active and fearless participation to place themselves in harm's way shows how the current generations of Iranian women born after the 1979 Revolution are indeed eager and courageous to fight for their rights.

Many prominent journalists are saying that the seed for a pro-reform revolution in Iran has been planted. Now only time will ripe the benefits. As we continue to watch and monitor the events in Iran, we can only hope that the Iranianscontinue to remain firm, fearless, and optimistic that their voices will indeed be acknowledged.

Iran and Technology

Undoubtedly the key players inciting, chanelling, and prolonging recent demonstrations in Iran have to be Facebook, Twitter, and text messages. Those three media have effectively initiated, harnassed, implemented, and monitored the various human processions that have erupted all throughout Iran. 

The government has belatedly banned foreign journalists to film demonstrations. The Iranian youth, deft in modern technology, are taking grainy and blurry shots of violence perpetuated by the secret police against them with their cell phones and disseminating through the internet. 

All international news agencies are urging Iranians to post videos, audios, and even to speak on air of the scenes they have witnessed. 

It must definitely be heady times in Iran right now. You can quickly spot young children among the millions of crowds roaming on the street shouting slogans, carrying banners, or remaining silent in mourning of the recent deceased. You can the sense that this is a revolution sprang from the under belly of the disenfranchised and disaffected youth who have been nurtured by progressive technology and western idealogies of freedom of speech. 

Even if Ahmedinajad is declared the actual winner of the election, the Iranian populace has achieved their goal. Governments only exists though the power of the people. The Iranian populace who had once overthrown the Shah on grounds of ineffectiveness and corruption has raised their voices against a government who has long ceased to cater to their needs. It is high time the Supreme Leader realizes the precarious ledge he is on. 

Emergence of Hate Groups

The American media alludes that the presidency of Obama has provoked the emerging visibility of hate groups in the United States.

Think the random shooting at the Holocaust Museum in DC by a white supremacist and the random killing of Dr. George Tiller, an abortionist, by a pro-life advocate.

In recent months, many Americans have taken law and order into their own hands at the dire results of others.

Dr. George Tiller was gunned down because he performed abortions. Oftentimes, he performed abortions on fetuses that were six months old. His killer, who is now proclaiming his satisfaction in killing Tiller, is a supporter of the pro-life movememnt. Before the fateful shooting that took his life Dr. Tiller was subjected to several death threats for his line of work. Far right wingers, notably Rush Limbaugh, had publicly decreed Dr. Tiller needed to be shot. Sometimes, our words do have the effect of persuading the masses to take drastic measures.

The Holocaust Museum shooting is nothing short of anti-semitism. The man, a noted anti-semitic, member of a white supremacist group, and earlier flagged by FBI, managed to shoot and kill a security guard at the door. His actual intent in opening fire at the Musuem is still unclear.

The American media is speculating that with the election of a black president, the racists, neo-nazis, white supremacists that thrive in the under belly of the United States are feeling things are out of their control. As a result, in order to regain their sense of control over a world that is rapidly changing, they resort to brute acts of force and murder. The news pundits speculate that since the election there has been a hike in the numbers of hate groups in America.

Apparently, United States needs to be wary and vigilant of enemies within their own lands.

Israel's Vision of Palestine

Netanyahu's vision of Palestine doesn't quite match the world's vision. Netanyahu, basically, envisions a Palestine that is left defenceless against its enemies. Yet Israel possess the right to bear arms. How can that be possible?

Can you imagine a state that is NOT allowed to defend itself against its enemies? Imagine in the 70s, Pakistan agreed to a state of Bangladesh, but without the right to defend itself? Essentially, Bangladesh would then be a puppet state, obliged to the whims and demands of stronger states that possess weaponry. We, Bangladeshis, would never stand for a ridiculous bargain as that. We would (and we did) demand self-autonomy and right to bear arms against any forms of foreign aggression.

Many news pundits termed Netanyahu's vision as a ghetto in place for a Palestinian state, and I have to agree. What would have been Israel's reaction if Palestine had decreed that Israel should be de-militarized? No nation can exist without having the rights to bear arms.

Probably due to pressure from Obama, Netanyahu agreed to recognize the necessity of a two-state existence; however, his interpretations will incite more displeasure and annoyance than positivity. Already pro-Palestine pundits are interpreting Netanyahu's policy speech has a impediment for the successful solution of the Palestine-Israel conflict. Already, his speech is generating ill fervour.

If Israel, indeed, wants a peace deal with Palestine that will encompass a two-state solution, then they must cease placing hypocritical and irrational bargaining chips on the table.