Honestly, I was flattered to see a photo of me on Jennifer Vaughan’s social media feed. She posted it a few weeks ago, during the first days of Pride Month, and it showed me at the 2013 Atlanta Pride parade. I was a Grand Marshal that year, and in the picture I’m wearing an HIV POSITIVE t-shirt and waving a sign that says “How Gay is THIS?”
I was living out loud, reminding revelers that people living with HIV exist, and having some cheeky fun. The photo was the first image in a video clip she had recorded.
I didn’t watch Vaughan’s video post, at least not then. I figured it was a supportive shout-out for Pride month. I even messaged Vaughan and thanked her for using my photo, never dreaming it was being used as Exhibit A in her “Blame the Gays” campaign, or that the immediate blowback against her views would lead to Vaughan’s social media meltdown. It’s a shocking and sad decline for someone who was once a well-regarded advocate living with HIV.
In that video message, Vaughan essentially claims that gay people are the only ones talking about HIV because we’re the only ones spreading it. She says that women cannot transmit the virus to men. She warns women that if you were infected by a man, he’s gay. Period. As if to twist the knife, Vaughan inserted the hashtag #HappyPride into the postings.
Those statements are misleading at best and cruelly homophobic at worst. Yes, HIV transmission from women to men isn’t one of the leading modes of transmission but it happens. There are multiple factors that can lead to a straight man becoming HIV positive. Throwing gays under the bus – and claiming any men infecting women are “down low,” as Vaughan does – insults both straight men and the gay men who have been in the forefront of the AIDS battle since the beginning.
I cannot speak to the trauma or inherent bias that Vaughan, who is a heterosexual straight woman living with HIV, might have. I can tell you that her post, and the subsequent posts in which she doubles down on her assertions, brought up a particular shame I haven’t felt in decades. I claim my trauma and I acknowledge how it affects the way I process this.
When I was diagnosed in the 1980s I felt exposed as a filthy homosexual who had done very specific things sexually to acquire HIV. I was embarrassed that everyone knew I had taken dick. We didn’t have our rights then as queer community, much less a lot of self-respect. I didn’t think I could feel that kind of shame again, not all these years later. Or at least not until these posts called out secretive sexual behaviors and pointed a finger at gay men, whom Vaughan lumps together as collectively complicit.
Vaughan is touchy about gay men, let’s put it that way. In subsequent posts, she complains that HIV conferences are overrun by gay men, as if we’re a vexing scourge rather than leaders and first responders. Ironically, the majority of registrants at the United States Conference on HIV/AIDS – a whopping 70% – are Black women. I’m not sure that fact would impress Vaughan. It’s hard to say who she values beyond other cisgender straight white women with an ax to grind.
Her schtick has worked well for her until now. Vaughan is attractive, has tons of followers, and is quite handy with a video selfie, even if her “can you believe a bossy blond gal like me could be positive?” attitude can’t help but lead you to consider the implications of race, resources, and privilege, all topics you will not find in abundance on her channels.
(Here’s a weird side note: Vaughan charges $20 to “personally answer your HIV questions,” and stipulates you must pay first before you send her a direct message. A woman has to make a living, sure, but I will admit that putting a paywall between public health information and someone worried about HIV is a unique business model. And, one must wonder, how much does she charge for follow-up questions? Is there a bulk discount? Are vulnerable people drawn into multiple questions, payments and answers? It has shades of Psychic Network to me. Is Jennifer Vaughan the Miss Cleo of HIV? But I digress.)
I tried to communicate with Vaughan about this. Before this issue blew up, I wrote to her and asked if we could talk more about it so I could better understand her and share why I felt it was hurtful.
Vaughan declined having a conversation. This is her complete response:
I appreciate you reaching out, but at this time I really don’t see any point of hashing it out back and forth. My statements and stance are very clear about transmission and how women contract HIV. I’m sad to see that you and the other advocates don’t see what is so clear and instead take the opportunity to vilify me. If you aren’t able to see (after 40+ years) the big picture and how HIV+ women are subjected to gay culture post diagnosis, then I don’t see how talking to me will change anything. We can amicably part ways. I don’t owe you or anyone else an additional explaining. And quite frankly I’m beyond flabbergasted at how you all have acted toward me.
Until the time of this exchange, I had only expressed to Vaughan my confusion and compassion. Her claiming women “are subjected to gay culture post-diagnosis,” however, sounds like we’re the embodiment of annoyingly loud disco music thumping through the walls of the apartment next door.
It gets worse.
When Vaughan received the blowback to her post that should surprise absolutely no one, she posted more videos claiming she was being bullied. Gurl. The gays know what bullying is and a lot of us did not survive it. This ain’t it.
When Vaughan was called out by people in the HIV community, she opted for a scorched earth response, telling Karl Schmid, Raif Derrazi and Dee Connor, advocates living with HIV who challenged Vaughan’s misinformation, to “fuck right off.” Yeah, she said that. On video.
Karl Schmid sent an email to an HIV organization’s board, on which Vaughan serves, to alert them about her inflammatory posts. Vaughan learned of his letter and responded as anyone would. She grabbed a photo of Schmid and put text across it that read: “This was probably after he sent the letter and then jacked off with excitement after.” Yes. She posted that on her feed.
Let’s just say that Vaughan’s taste level appears to have deteriorated, along with her ability to communicate in a reasonable manner.
View this post on Instagram
Karl Schmid is more concerned with the misinformation than Vaughan’s personal attacks. “It’s incredibly disappointing,” said Schmid, who is the host and executive producer at Plus Life Media. “But beyond that, it’s dangerous. While I think we all agree the risk is very low for female-to-male transmission, there needs to be more conversations and support given to those who contract the virus unknowingly from a sexual partner who hasn’t been honest – but claims that it is homosexual men who are the reason HIV is being spread is not only homophobic but incredibly stigmatizing. Numerous folks who have interacted with her have all told me that she has either blocked them or made personal attacks via her social accounts when they disagreed with her stance.”
Comedian Andy Feds, who was born with HIV, backed that up. Feds is straight but knows about allyship, and he doesn’t like what he saw on Vaughan’s channels. “I tagged her with statistics from several HIV/AIDS websites,” Feds explained to me. “I also mentioned that women who get HIV from men, the men aren’t always gay. I told her that narratives like this are homophobic and create a bigger stereotype. She blocked me.”
“Whatever it takes to make sure that she’s no longer spitting out false information, I’m all for it,” Feds continued. “As someone who’s lived with this virus my entire life, and lost my mom to AIDS complications, I cannot sit back in silence and let this continue. I just can’t.”
“If our advocacy leads to harm to others, it is not in the best interest of anyone,” said Dee Connor, a woman living with HIV who posted her own response to Vaughan on her popular social media channels. “It is concerning when misinformation is spread, such as telling women living with HIV that they cannot transmit the virus to men and that only gay men can transmit HIV. This false narrative can perpetuate internalized stigma among women seeking support within the HIV community. Despite the importance of using our voices, it is disappointing to see a lack of response from other women on this matter.”
Speaking of other women, I reached out to The Well Project, an international online community of women living with HIV, for reaction to the postings. This is their statement:
The crucial education and support that The Well Project provides for women living with and vulnerable to HIV across the gender spectrum is deeply rooted in evidence-based, affirming information that encourages knowledge and agency over one’s health. Stigma is the key driver of the HIV epidemic which is why we fight so hard against it. As we have at every step in our decades-long history, we stand with our gay allies in the fight against HIV and in opposition to stigmatizing language, blaming, shaming, and any type of hate speech. We encourage our community to avail ourselves of the decades of research and science that advocates have struggled and collaborated to secure, which have taught us so much about HIV.
It is worth noting that Vaughan was once among the women bloggers for The Well Project, but there is no longer any trace of her writing on their site.
This entire episode may very well say something beyond one advocate and her crude dismissal of others. Might it be the way our culture and politics have sown division as the default?
We as an HIV community are not immune to the shift from facts to grievance in our discourse. It is real and it is damaging, whether in our politics or our HIV advocacy. The multiple constituencies in the HIV arena that have worked together so effectively haven’t always been woven perfectly but the fabric we created has been strong.
And then there are reminders, like a flurry of posts on social media, that our allyship and shared respect for the truth can turn on a dime.
Mark
p.s. I actually think the issues raised above, underneath the resentment and factual overreach, are worth discussion – in a forum by and for women, of course. There are lots of women living with HIV because their sexual partner was dishonest with them. Obviously, they deserve a space to deal with that. It is also true that female-to-male transmission rates in this country are very low. I don’t think anyone, including “the gays,” would argue with any of that. I think in this case it was the all-or-nothing approach of this particular messenger, who bent these facts and added a lot of contempt for gay men, that made it so inflammatory.
That said, women will decide how and in what way they wish to explore this topic, if at all. Jennifer’s actions and words affected me as a gay man and so I responded. That doesn’t mean the issues are not worth exploring with sensitivity and thought – and with the facts. I would hate for the drama to cut off any discussion about the realities at the heart of this. Neither myself nor other dedicated allies of women living with HIV would want that.
