History repeating

Professor Jolanda Jetten

ARC Laureate Fellow
School of Psychology and Professor of Social Psychology

From an evolutionary perspective, it makes good sense to stay at a physical distance from those showing signs of being infected with a contagious virus.

Unfortunately, however, we may not always look in the right place when assessing the risk of contagion, resulting in minority groups often being singled out as suspected sources of pathogen threat. This happens even when there is no actual evidence suggesting the minority in question poses a risk.  

Consider the extent to which stereotypes reigned free during the COVID-19 pandemic and coloured our perceptions of specific ethnicities, triggering new forms of bigotry, and exacerbating and legitimising some old forms of prejudice and stereotyping.

A case in point is India. In the context of long-standing conflict between Hindus and Muslims, the COVID-19 pandemic was used to legitimise hostility and attacks on minorities.

Historically too, concerns about contagion have enhanced xenophobia towards foreigners and minorities. For example, in 14th century Europe, Jews were falsely held responsible for the spread of the plague and their persecution continued long after the pandemic ended. These are not inevitable processes though.

For example, while former US President Donald Trump fuelled stereotyping of American-Asians by calling COVID-19 the 'Chinese virus', other world leaders discredited such prejudice against groups and called instead for unity and inclusion in the fight against the virus (e.g. New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern).

This is particularly important because stigma and discrimination inevitably takes its toll. Being a target of prejudice is reliably associated with a heightened stress response, both physical and psychological. Importantly too, if left unchecked, prejudice and intergroup hostility will ultimately polarise society and undermine its social fabric. 

It is therefore important to avoid repeating past mistakes now that the monkeypox virus poses a new collective challenge.

Dr Karin Sellberg

Lecturer in Humanities, School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry

Infectious disease is never simply a matter of science, but in its very definition emerges from shared environments and social settings, in the meetings and connections between people. As such, it often produces social prejudice and stigma.

Few diseases have attracted more stigma in modern times than AIDS and HIV. When first identified and acknowledged in the early 1980s, it was initially thought to be a disease solely associated with homosexual men and users of intravenous drugs. Despite the production of ample conflicting evidence, this view has persisted.

Right-wing social commentators and politicians went as far as to claim that it was a form of divine retribution against sin and iniquity, and there was a concerted effort required to convince the general public that anyone could catch HIV, including the infamous 1987 Australian ‘Grim Reaper’ advert, featuring women and children falling like bowling pins.

What emerged was a careful curation of the narrative surrounding HIV/AIDS, both from the Christian right-wing politicians, and opposing radical activist movements. The HIV/AIDS epidemic was devastating both physically and socially for the LGBTQIA community of the 1980s and 1990s, yet most historians of sexuality agree that it also became a catalyst for the foundation of a shared social and political platform and voice – through grassroots activism, and the development of AIDS performance and arts movements.

The LGBTQIA community became visible, and through the lens of art and theatre, the suffering and resilience of the victims of the HIV/AIDS epidemic evoked sympathy as well as stigma. The story of AIDS became a means of community healing.

Associate Professor Lisa Fitzgerald,
Associate Professor Allyson Mutch,
Chris Howard

School of Public Health and Queensland Positive People

Certain diseases attract social stigma. Diseases perceived to be contagious, terminal, and visible have moral connotations, while those seen as the responsibility of the individual are often the most stigmatised.

In the case of HIV-related stigma, the prejudice, discrediting, labelling, stereotyping, and discrimination directed at people living with HIV has been a persistent feature of the HIV epidemic for the last 4 decades.

HIV stigma is caused by fear and moral judgement, and is based on outdated knowledge, incorrect information, and a general lack of awareness, understanding and empathy. The impacts of HIV-related stigma are not only felt by those living with HIV, but also partners, families, and key social groups.

In our longitudinal qualitative research with people living with HIV long term, we have witnessed the cumulative impact of stigma on people’s lives, and how it insidiously intersects with other forms of stigma, such as homophobia, ageism, racism and sexism.

Stopping HIV-related stigma requires multiple approaches. Practical strategies for people who experience stigma, as well as community-wide efforts to improve understanding of what it means to live with HIV are needed to directly challenge stigmatising attitudes, outdated myths and stereotypes, and to ensure non-discriminatory legislation.

We all have a role to play in reducing HIV-related stigma by educating ourselves, calling out stigmatising actions and attitudes, and correcting misinformation to help others learn.