2. Our Perception: AIDS In Singapore

For my entry this week, I have decided to analyse a postcard distributed by the Action For AIDS Organisation in Singapore. Action For Aids (AfA) is a voluntary community-based organisation, that also acts as a charity. It is also a member of the National Council of Social Service (NCSS). The AfA usually distributes postcards about HIV testing, safe-sex practices, and general information about sexually transmitted diseases (STD’s) at public events, such as fund raisers and on their website at http://www.afa.org.sg/. This postcard was printed about 4-5 years ago, but is currently still being used on their website to promote safe-sex practices.

I was looking through a pile of postcards, when I came across the one featured above and decided to use it for my blog entry analysis, as I felt that I had a lot to write about in terms of perception and human communication. To be honest, I deliberated for quite a while over the postcard, as I was not sure if the content was too provocative or risque’ to be used on my blog. However, the fact that I deliberated over it and even asked my friends for their opinions, convinced me even more that I should use it, as it made me realize that I myself had formed perceptions over it.

My first impression of the postcard was the message. It was in contrast to the surroundings, and I found the pun on the “See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil” proverb ingenious. Most people would get the indirect message of the postcard, which is “Spread No AIDS”. I found the use of this proverb in this context extremely apt, as it has intensity due to the fact that it is widely known, and this would increase the probability of people getting the message, thus fulfilling the AfA’s aim to educate Singaporeans about HIV and AIDS.

It was only after a few seconds, that I realized that there were only men displayed on the postcard. It was only then, when I started to deliberate about using it for my blog. Due to the frequency of the men displayed nude on the postcard, I felt that the AfA was solely targeting a homosexual audience and as a result, committing the error of oversimplification, as it was only addressing one spectrum of society. Plus, by only putting men on the agenda, the perceptual error of omission was also committed, as it gives the impression that women do not suffer from HIV or AIDS. There is also distortion, as it perpetuates an erroneous impression that the majority of HIV/AIDS patients are homosexuals.

The main cause for my deliberation was the schema in my framework, which made me think of the governments’ stance towards homosexuality. This postcard was disseminated in public, and the organisation has certain ties with the government. Thus, to a certain extent, it appears to undercut the governments’ stance, as it acknowledges the homosexual presence in society.

Then, I decided to look at the message printed behind the postcard:

Based on the above caption, the postcard is trying to draw awareness towards the discrimination of HIV-positive people. If that’s the case, then the picture could be interpreted from an entirely different point of view. The “Spread No Evil” message could be referring to discrimination, not HIV/AIDS. The men could have been displayed purely for emphasis and to grab peoples’ attention. The nudity could be reflective of humanity’s vulnerability to this epidemic. Thus, it can be argued that it does not subvert the governments’ stance. As a result, I feel that there is subjectivity of interpretation in relation to the motives of this postcard. I also feel that the ambiguity of this postcard was deliberate, so as to grab the attention of the public.

It is hard for me to disregard my first impression, and thus I still do feel that the message is referring to AIDS, due to the use of the AIDS symbol in the “No” part of the message and the way the postcard is portrayed. Thus, if it is targeted towards a gay audience, it tells us a lot about how society views homosexuals in relation to HIV/AIDS in Singapore. Statistically, the percentage of HIV cases among heterosexuals in 2006 and 2007 constituted to about 65% (statistics from the Ministry of Health website, http://www.moh.gov.sg/mohcorp/statistics.aspx?id=246#table1) of all cases in Singapore. In my opinion, the postcard reflects an attribution error.

Furthermore, I can conclude that the postcard is perpetuating a personal construct of gay men, that they are all muscular, fit and thus concerned about their appearance. I can also say that, as much as the postcard has good intentions, it is propagating a stereotypical point of view in regards to gay men. This could lead to people being very judgemental towards muscular men, and also pressurise gay men to feel the need to live up to a certain ideal.

Lastly, I also observed the use of an organisational principle, figure and ground, on the postcard. Although the message is strategically placed in the middle, the picture takes up the whole postcard, and thus exerts a considerable influence on our perception.