I was never aware of the size of the HIV/AIDS infection in Russia. I remember TV commercials, greyscale and quietly dramatic, warning against getting infected. There were never stats presented, nor was there ever a conversation - in school, with parents or among peers. Dirty needles was a problem when I was growing up. I've never witnessed people using, but I'd seen a lot of empty syringes around. I could find one a day just by going to school and back, which took five minutes. My mother would always caution me against picking them up. It never connected with HIV/AIDS in my head, but I reckon now they had something to do with each other. Can't confirm or deny it, but I wouldn't be surprised to hear someone in Russia say that. The main HIV/AIDS conversation was around heterosexual relationships. The commercials would always portray young men and women; never two men or two women. Homosexuality is not even a conversation in the mainstream, mostly because it's led by bullheaded, narrow-minded old wheezers whose views would be welcome in the Republican Party of the US. Young men still stay away from the subject because of the same macho bullshit, but it's hereditary rather than self-assumed. Young women? I'm not sure they'd mind it so much. At least gay men make for decent male friends - something young women nowadays lack dramatically. It's been a while since I've heard the term, but that's probably because I don't hang out with bigots. If you say it today, people will understand you.about how HIV/AIDS was getting really bad over there.
But supposedly (and you may be able to confirm this), part of the reason it was spreading so much was that it was still seen as a "gay" disease, and so people just wouldn't deal with it.
is голубой still used as a slang (and not very nice, as I understand it) word for gay people?
I remember at the time, the stats on infection rates were getting pretty bad. Not like sub-Saharan Africa bad, but still bad. Sadly, a quick search does not suggest things have gotten any better. This article from 2015 mostly focuses on how the government is fucking the dog on the issue: From here (autoplay video warning), we have this: Russian government statistics show that more than half of new infections are transmitted through intravenous drug use. And the rate of infection is rising. Finally, this one is local (although I know nothing about the publication). Still, if I'm reading the headline correctly, it says that Russia had more (new?) HIV infections than the rest of Europe combined. Sadly all these articles pretty much suggest the same thing: a combination of conservative policies (that gut spending, refuse to allow sex ed, and basically pretend the problem doesn't exist) and IV drug use."Look at what they are currently doing with their budget. Will we get more signs on the metro telling us HIV doesn't occur in monogamous relationships?" Malyshev said, referring to a current public information campaign on the Moscow subway. The signs read: "Love and loyalty to your partner is your protection from AIDS" and "HIV isn't transferred through friendship."
According to the United Nations' UNAIDS program, Russia had the third-highest number of new HIV infections globally in 2015, behind South Africa and Nigeria.
That's Russia's way of dealing with any serious problem. My hope is that, once the USSR generation dies off, the younger people would be more willing to have a conversation about sex, sexuality and related issues. Right now, sex ed is maybe a thing of two private schools. HIV? "Just don't do it". Those are terrifying stats, to be frank. "behind South Africa and Nigeria" - fuck! P.S. Kommersant is, to my knowledge, a respectable newspaper, but I'm no expert.and basically pretend the problem doesn't exist
We have no small amount of that here, as you've no doubt seen. I think it's simply human nature: we're hard-wired to ignore contrary evidence, especially when it's something that our egos get wrapped up in (such as group affiliation).