The Boundaries of Blackness: AIDS and the Breakdown of Black Politics

Reading it for a course in Political Theory and it is captivating. Having lived in NYC in the late eighties and early nineties, AIDS was of great concern and only the gay and lesbian communities were very active, so too the black communities, but on a smaller scale according to my black friends. It was heartwrenching to watch friends whiter away because not nearly enough was done and organizing increased too slow. Mostly because AIDS had to do with sex and drugs, and with an underclass of gays, lesbians and minorities. As a European I was astounded that Americans can only look at an issue that is so human and affects everybody, so viscerally and not in a pragmatic problem-solving way. This book shows darkest parts of American society and that the culture of denial is devastating. America has a lot to learn and a long way to go.

Seminal work; Outstanding acct of public health history affecting African Americans. Thank you!

Cohen examines AIDS as a cross-cutting issue laced with stigma and rooted in African-American communities, which provides insight into how black leaders, organizations, and community members respond to the changing political environment that confronts all marginal groups in the 21st century. (9) She highlights the development of indigenous structures, resources, leaders, and information as a response to the exclusion created by marginalization and cross-cutting issues within the African American community.(37) Cohen also examines the roles of the CDC and the national print media in defining who was at risk, what were the appropriate paths for research, reporting, and responses that others would follow.(121) She condemns the national media’s portrayal of AIDS through the lenses of Magic Johnson and Arthur Ashe as one which further marginalizes AIDS for the black gay community and drug using community, which posits both of these as deviant behaviors. Cohen then tackles the role of black media in the portrayal of AIDS within the black community. She claims that historically the black press has been integral in providing information that helped shape the political agenda for black Americans. (188) Cohen then attacks the responses to the AIDS epidemic by the NAACP, Urban League and “black churches.” She claims that this issue should guide us in asking what role should and can such institutions play in the more cross-cutting politics of black communities in the 21st century? (258) She concludes her scathing rebuke of the African American communities’ response to AIDS with an examination of the “on-again, off-again” responses of elected black officials. Cohen’s condemnation of Black politics, thus, focuses on the marginalization and the cross cutting issues that surround the AIDS epidemic. Cohen’s work adds to the marginalization and “cross-cutting” issues faced within Black studies through the lenses of the AIDS epidemic and its impact upon the Black community and Black politics. What I find to be relevant is the attention that Cohen plays to those groups that are marginalized specifically by AIDS: gay Blacks and IV drug users. I appreciated her analysis of the shaping of the discourse surrounding the AIDS epidemic by the CDC, the national media and Black media outlets. By shining an academic light upon the struggles of those marginalized Cohen is able to examine the impact of AIDS upon a broader swath of the Black community. Another point I believe to be relevant is that, as Cohen points out, there is no one monolithic Black story. I also appreciated her attack on this very narrative as being defined by Magic Johnson and Arthur Ashe’s story of resistance because theirs was not one of “deviant” behavior. This brought me to a bigger question: who defines deviant or queer behavior? Or, as the case may be, who defines “respectability”? Because there is no one monolithic Black community than how do these terms respectability, deviant and queer apply to Black studies?

I was reluctant to read or buy this book because I figured that a) I didn't want to hear a white person trash 'the' black community, and b) I didn't want to read a political science book that couldn't possibly cover any new ground on AIDS that fiction writers and progressive activists haven't already done. Fortunately, I was surprised on both fronts. Cohen is an African-American woman (she never explains how she got the last name Cohen) and does try to be mindful of being 'another black academic out to trash black folks' (xi). In addition, she provides a poli. sci. framework in which to look at how African-Americans prioritized or failed to prioritize AIDS that I think could be used to analyze numerous other issues. Cohen investigates black people's response to AIDS through medicine, the press, religious organization, and the Congress from 1981 to 1993. The book is not perfect. Chapters are completely misnamed. (One chapter about the 'dreaded bisexual' only discussed bisexual men for a page at most.) She at times is overly critical of black institutions. (She often states that the black press never covered HIV+ black gay men or HIV+ women activists and I can think of numerous articles in the magazines she examines which actually did what she wanted.) Nevertheless, this was an incredible book. I encourage everyone to purchase it, especially those interested in black gay issues or African-American studies.

Cathy adduces an interesting and innovative argument by detailing the way in which the black political heirarchy reacted to the AIDS epidemic and comes to the conclusion that black political leadership is flawed. I don't want to give away too much of her argument, but I must say I disagree with her. That being said, it is still a must read.