| Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
Disciplining Bodies, Desires and Subjectivities: Sexuality and HIV-Positive WomenRyerson University, mgurevic{at}ryerson.ca
UBC Okanagan, cynthia.mathieson{at}ubc.ca
jo{at}logicalparadox.com
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, bramilee_dhayanandhan{at}camh.net Very little is known about the sexuality of women who are living with HIV, outside the context of risk prevention and education. Available research in the first-world context shows that, although most women continue to be sexually active following diagnosis, decreased sexual functioning is very common and more prevalent than among HIV-positive men. The present multi-site Canadian study is concerned with the ways in which womens sexuality is transformed by the experience of living with HIV. Semi-structured interviews with 20 women were analysed using thematic decomposition, an analytic technique that combines discursive approaches with thematic analysis. The women in this study construct HIV as inhibiting in relation to sexuality. A predominant discourse of disciplining bodies, desires and subjectivities emerges, which centers on the restrictions imposed by an HIV-positive diagnosis. The following discursive constructions, in particular, emerge from the womens accounts: diminished spontaneity, foreclosed (provisional) sexual freedom, foreclosed power, foreclosed flirtation, inciting violence, (un)natural sex, responsibility imperatives, muted/mutated sexuality, and diminished intimacy. The womens predominant positioning within AIDS discourses as conduits of transmission, the relative neglect of womens psychological and sexual health concerns in both research and public health agendas, and womens relatively anomalous standing in AIDS communities imposes limits on bodies, lives, and subjectivities. These are reflected in these womens accounts, wherein a focus on protecting others frequently impedes access to fulfilling (and safe) sexual and emotional relationships.
Key Words: discourse HIV intimacy power protection spontaneity responsibility risk
Feminism & Psychology, Vol. 17, No. 1,
9-38 (2007) |
|||