AIDS i nezadovoljstvo - Ucutkivanje Gay seksualnosti u Srbiji

1.
AIDS
and
its
discontents
in
Serbia:
Silencing
gay
sexuality
in
the
age
of
illness
Zoran
Milosavljević
September
2012
Supervisors:
Dr
Mark
Johnson
University
of
Hull,
UK
Dr
Edyta
Just
University
of
Lodz,
Poland
Dissertation
submitted
in
partial
fulfilment
of
the
requirements
for
the
degree
of
Master
of
Arts
in
Women’s
and
Gender
Studies
GEMMA,
in
the
University
of
Hull

2.
AIDS
and
its
discontents
in
Serbia:
Silencing
gay
sexuality
in
the
age
of
illness
Zoran
Milosavljević
September
2012
Supervisors:
Dr
Mark
Johnson
University
of
Hull,
UK
Approved
by:
Dr
Edyta
Just
University
of
Lodz,
Poland
Dissertation
submitted
in
partial
fulfilment
of
the
requirements
for
the
degree
of
Master
of
Arts
in
Women’s
and
Gender
Studies
GEMMA,
in
the
University
of
Hull

3. Abstract
This
thesis
analyses
the
perpetuation
of
the
HIV/AIDS
epidemic
in
Serbia
as
directly
resulting
from
the
rejection
and
silencing
of
gay
sexuality.
The
increasing
number
of
HIV/AIDS
cases,
with
30%
of
cases
diagnosed
only
at
the
terminal
stage
of
the
illness,
is
a
testament
to
the
spreading
of
the
epidemic
in
Serbia.
The
HIV
positive
gay
men’s
life-­‐management
in
the
HIV/AIDS
discourse
is
further
complicated
with
the
enormous
discrimination
and
stigmatisation
by
the
majority
in
Serbia.
The
HIV
positive
gay
men
are
discriminated
on
grounds
of
both
their
sexuality
and
the
illness.
Such
double
discrimination
causes
them
to
want
to
maintain
undetectability
of
the
virus
(the
illness)
and
of
the
sexual
identity
for
as
long
as
possible.
The
discrimination
and
stigmatisation
on
grounds
of
gay
sexuality
is
structured
around
the
silence
of
the
majority
toward
it.
The
silencing
enforces
mimicry
in
the
body
politics
of
gay
people.
Such
mimicry
is
visible
in
the
variety
of
their
practices:
from
the
masculinisation
of
their
bodies
to
the
testing
and
the
‘forced
coming-­‐out’
in
the
medical
and
other
state
institutions.
The
biomedicalistation
of
the
public
health
structures
the
identity
of
the
HIV
positive
gay
men
through
the
‘forced
coming-­‐out’,
leading
them
to
reveal
their
sexuality
in
highly
discriminatory
surroundings
of
Serbian
society.
Sexuality
is
the
main
attribute
of
the
discrimination,
but
is
silenced
in
Serbian
institutions.
The
current
policy
against
HIV/AIDS
and
other
STDs
in
Serbia
is
futile
and
tumultuous.
This
is
especially
evident
in
the
educational
and
medical
discourses.
The
non-­‐existence
of
sexual
education
further
enhances
the
rejection
of
the
differences
among
the
people
in
Serbia.
The
rejection
of
the
HIV
positive
gay
men
is
present
even
among
the
group
of
the
PLHIV,
which
brings
into
the
focus
of
this
thesis
their
inclusion
in
all
levels
of
society:
the
voices
of
these
men
and
women
are
our
best
weapon
against
the
dominant
silence.
Key
words:
HIV/AIDS,
Serbia,
gay,
sexuality,
discrimination,
body
politics,
mimicry

4. Content
Acknowledgements
5
List
of
abbreviations
6
Introduction
7
1.1
Transitional
Serbian
society
18
1.2
AIDS
epidemiology
in
Serbia
26
1.3
Biomedical
discourse
29
1.4
Educational
discourse
34
2.1
Gay
sexual
minority
in
Serbia
&
homophobia
38
Chapter
I
Chapter
II
2.2
Anthropology
of
everyday
life
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
in
Serbia
44
Chapter
III
3.1
Methodology
of
the
research
and
analyses
of
the
interviews
Conclusion
54
71
Bibliography
77

5. Acknowledgements
My
gratitude
for
the
contribution
to
this
work
goes
to:
my
supervisors,
dr
Mark
Johnson
from
the
University
of
Hull,
UK,
and
dr
Edyta
Just
from
the
University
of
Lodz,
Poland
without
who’s
experience
and
guidance
this
work
would
not
be
possible;
dr
Damir
Arsenijević
for
his
loving
support,
encouragement
and
wittiness,
Tag
McEntegart,
Branko
Marković,
Brankica
Aćimović,
Boris
Gidak,
Nataša
Jović-­‐Cvetković,
Violeta
Andjelković,
Vladimir
Veljković,
Zoran
Railić
M.D.,
Djurica
Stankov,
Dušan
Marjanović,
Dimitar
Matrakoski,
Bojan,
Dimitrije,
Svetlana
Krabel,
Jelena
Petrović,
Alma
Tanović
and
to
my
parents,
Branislava
Anaćijević
and
Siniša
Milosavljević.
5

6. List
of
abbreviations
AIDS
–
Acquired
Immunodeficiency
Syndrome
ARV
–
Antiretroviral
therapy
EU
–
European
Union
HAART
–
Highly
active
antiretroviral
therapy
HIV–
Human
Immunodeficiency
Virus
LGBT–
Lesbian,
gay,
bisexual
and
transgender
MSM
–
Men
who
have
sex
with
men
MSWM
–
Men
who
have
sex
with
men
and
women
NGO
–
Non-­‐governmental
organisations
PEP
–
Post
expositional
prophylaxis
PLHIV
–
People
who
are
living
with
HIV/AIDS
RAC
–
Republic
National
AIDS
Committee
of
Serbia
STD
–
Sexually
transmitted
diseases
UNAIDS
–
Joint
United
Nations
Programme
on
HIV/AIDS
UNDP
–
United
Nations
Development
Programme
UNICEF
–
United
Nations
Children’s
Fund
USOP
–
Union
of
PLHIV
organisations
in
Serbia
6

7. Introduction
Numerous
questions
arise
when
information
comes
to
light,
during
the
course
of
World
AIDS
Day,
on
the
1st
December
2011,
that
the
promoter
of
safer
sex
in
Serbia
is
a
famous
gay
porn
actor
from
barebacking
online
sites
–
not
to
mention
that
he
has
been
HIV
positive
for
seven
years.
You
could
ask
yourself
if
this
is
a
mistake
of
the
organiser,
the
Ministry
of
Health
of
the
Republic
of
Serbia,
or
a
bad
joke
perpetrated
between
activists
to
discredit
each
other
in
the
battle
to
secure
funds
from
the
Global
Fund1
for
the
fight
against
HIV/AIDS.
Or
you
could
ask
yourself
whether
the
famous
gay
porn
actor
has
an
equal
right
to
be
represented
in
the
media
and
to
share
his
experience
about
HIV/AIDS?
What
about
achievements
in
the
education
of
youth
concerning
HIV/AIDS,
and
the
population
in
general
in
Serbia?
You
would
probably
ask
yourself
(if
or
when
you
find
out
about
it!)
why
it
is
that,
in
Serbia,
in
2011,
33%
of
the
people
infected
with
HIV
are
diagnosed
in
the
last
stages
of
AIDS?
Why
did
they
do
that
to
themselves?
What
is
the
cause
of
such
irresponsible
behaviour?
Is
it
a
lack
of
knowledge
about
HIV/AIDS
or
maybe
it’s
fear?
But
then,
fear
of
what?
This
‘schizoid’
episode
is
a
microcosm
of
the
state
of
the
AIDS
epidemic
in
Serbia
today.
This
thesis
seeks
to
investigate
if,
and,
if
so,
how
the
negative
social
response
to
gay
sexuality
is
intensifying
the
HIV/AIDS
epidemic
in
Serbia.
The
rising
number
of
the
infected
gay
men
and
the
33%
of
PLHIV
diagnosed
in
the
last
stages
of
AIDS
should
be
signalling
a
state
of
‘high
alert’.
Something
is
seriously
malfunctioning
in
the
response
to
HIV/AIDS
in
Serbia.
Paradoxically,
in
this
time
of
easy
access
to
information,
the
present
state
of
the
AIDS
epidemic
in
Serbia,
and
the
discourses
around
AIDS,
are
showing
confusion;
a
lack
of
clear
ideas
as
to
how
to
proceed
to
tackle
it;
as
result
of
economic
instability,
slow
progress;
rejection
of
the
‘other’(s)
sexualities;
and
institutional
neglect.
As
the
result
of
the
present
situation,
the
identity
politics
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
further
evolve
into
the
body
politics
of
mimicry
and
defence
against
stigmatisation.
Taken
together,
all
those
are
the
excellent
conditions
for
the
vicious
spiral
that
is
HIV/AIDS
in
Serbia.
The
silencing
is
an
unbearable
process
for
the
one
who
is
doing
it.
In
that
way
you
are
pushing
the
problem
deeper
without
the
resolution.
Silencing
is
also
an
aspect
of
the
human
condition.
It
is
not
problematic
if
you
are
dealing
with
a
small
problem.
Maybe
you
will
forget
about
it.
However,
if
you
try
to
ignore
a
big
problem
for
long
enough,
the
1
Global
Fund
To
Fight
AIDS,
Tuberculosis
and
Malaria,
see
http://www.theglobalfund.org/en/
7

8. problem
could
become
greater.
This
is
most
certainly
the
case
when
you
have
deadly
disease
spreading
among
people
already
scared
that
they
are
going
to
be
stigmatized
because
of
their
sexuality
and
then,
on
top
of
that,
because
of
the
disease.
This
is
the
situation
facing
the
overwhelming
majority
of
gay
people
in
Serbia
infected
with
HIV,
or
living
with
AIDS
related
illnesses.
In
this
thesis
I
will
examine
the
connections
between
the
double
stigmatisation
of
HIV
positive
gay
men,
and
the
persistence
and
growth
of
the
AIDS
epidemic
in
Serbia.
I
will
examine
the
social
response
that
‘silences’
gay
sexuality,
as
well
as
the
politics
of
resistance
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
to
the
predominant
social
stigmatisation.
Stigmatisation
on
the
ground
of
sexuality
and
stigmatisation
on
the
ground
of
illness
(HIV/AIDS)
are
the
two
predominant
components
of
the
double
stigmatisation
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
in
Serbia.
The
stigmatisation
on
the
ground
of
illness
is
shaped
by
the
discourses
that
are
structuring
HIV
positive
gay
men’s
subjectivity,
mostly
through
the
biomedical
and
educational
discourse.
The
discourse
of
biomedicine,
and,
as
its
integral
part
of
that,
the
pharmaceuticalization2
of
public
health,
is
emerging
from
the
development
of
the
medical
knowledge
and
the
advantages
that
affords
those
fighting
the
disease.
For
so
many
HIV
positive
gay
men,
the
moment
of
truth
embodied
in
an
HIV
positive
result,
also
becomes
the
moment
of
‘forced
coming
out’,
within
their
own
social
circle
of
their
sexual
identity
.
In
Serbia,
where
the
gay
sexual
minority
is
still
stigmatized,
and
its
rights
are
ignored,
that
moment
is
very
stressful
for
the
gay
individual
and,
if
at
all
possible,
should
be
mitigated.
Stigmatisation
on
the
grounds
of
their
sexuality
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
is
the
most
visible
manifestation
of
the
social
‘silencing’
of
it,
and,
in
the
politics
of
mimicry
adopted
by
the
gay
sexual
minority,
its
result
is
apparent.
Social
policy
in
the
field
of
HIV/AIDS
is
also
an
important
factor
for
the
life
management
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
in
the
AIDS
discourse.
Unfortunately,
such
policy
is
under
the
constant
influence
of
the
predominant
social
model
of
the
rejection
of
gay
sexuality
and
is
very
visible
through
the
process
of
its
silencing.
The
undetectability
of
the
virus
(upheld
by
avoiding
the
biomedical
procedures)
and
the
undetectability
of
the
gay
sexuality
(upheld
through
the
politics
of
mimicry
and
social
silencing)
are
the
two
major
components
of
the
body
politics
of
HIV
positive
gay
2
Under
the
notion
of
‘pharmaceuticalization
of
public
health’
Biehl
assumes
the
involvement
of
pharmaceutical
companies,
producers
of
ARV
therapy,
in
the
different
processes
of
providing
and
subsidising
ARV
therapy
in
the
policy
of
the
state
‘therapy
for
all’.
See
Biehl,
2009,
p.97-­‐101
8

9. men
in
Serbia.
These
two
components
are
the
main
cause
of
the
devastation
being
wrought
by
the
HIV/AIDS
epidemic
in
Serbia.
This
thesis
argues
for
a
separation
to
be
made
between
gay
sexuality
and
the
dominant
perception
of
gay
sexuality
as
the
illness.
The
aim
of
this
thesis
is
to
emphasise
the
importance
of
the
necessary
recognition,
by
Serbian
society,
of
gay
sexuality
and
its
impact
on
HIV/AIDS
epidemic.
The
connection
between
these
two
should
be
taken
into
account
for
any
successful
strategy
against
AIDS.
To
provide
a
basis
for
the
correction
and
the
redefinition
of
the
educational
procedures
that
claim
to
educate
about
the
illness
and
the
sexual
differences
in
Serbia
is
one
of
the
main
purposes
of
this
thesis.
It
is
hoped
that
such
an
outcome
will
be
attributable
to
this
thesis.
The
voices
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
and
the
people
around
them,
seeing
the
light
of
day
for
the
first
time
in
this
thesis
speak
firmly
in
favour
of
this
aim.
Their
life
experiences
are
of
immensurable
help
in
the
endeavour
to
understand
the
problems
they
face
everyday
in
their
fight
against
HIV/AIDS.
Finally,
this
thesis
is
about
the
social
construction
of
sexuality
and
the
social
construction
of
lies
(about
difference,
sexuality,
and
illness).
It
provides
an
insight
into
how
deliberate
neglect
of
sexual
differences
in
Serbia
has
provided
and
continues
to
provide
fertile
conditions
for
the
spread
of
the
disease
and
for
the
dangerous
spiral
of
the
HIV/AIDS
epidemic.
Theoretical
framework
The
complex
power
web
around
HIV
positive
gay
men’s
subjectivity
and
the
structuring
of
gay
sexual
identity
are
inevitably
embedded
in
the
context
of
the
Serbian
society.
To
understand
such
a
complex
web
of
discourses
I
decided
to
use
a
map
structure
as
the
tool
that
would
most
usefully
unlock
deeper
and
wider
insight
into
the
perpetuating
HIV/AIDS
epidemic.3
The
map
will
complement
the
theoretical
framework
and
to
illustrate
the
improved
understanding
of
the
process
of
silencing
of
gay
sexuality
and,
as
the
result
of
that,
the
perpetuation
of
HIV/AIDS
epidemic.
In
the
first
chapter,
I
take
a
closer
look
into
recent
Serbian
history.
When
combined
this
history,
the
epidemiological
situation
with
regard
to
HIV/AIDS
and
the
biomedical
and
educational
discourse
of
HIV/AIDS
will
provide
the
context
of
Serbian
society.
3
See
the
table
9

10.
10

11. The
second
chapter
will
closely
examine
the
gay
sexual
minority
in
Serbia
and
an
anthropology
of
the
everyday
life
of
HIV
positive
gay
men.
The
second
chapter
focuses
on
the
interconnections
between
social
rejection
and
the
body
politics
of
mimicry
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
toward
health
and
sexuality’s
mimicry.
When
considering
the
politics
of
mimicry,
the
study
investigates
the
variety
of
practices
of
HIV
positive
gay
men:
from
avoiding
‘forced
coming
out’
in
medical
institutions;
through
the
masculinisation
of
their
bodies
and
the
abuse
of
steroids
in
AIDS
related
illnesses;
to
the
disclosure
of
gay
sexual
identity
in
their
social
surroundings.
This
politics
is
the
protective
shield
against
the
discriminatory
politics
towards
gay
people
in
Serbia.
The
third
chapter
analyses
interviews
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
and
people
who
are
coming
from
the
different
professions
connected
to
with
HIV
positive
gay
men:
using
feminist
and
gay
studies’
methodology,
this
provides
evidence
of
their
everyday
life
practices
and
analyses
their
attitudes
and
notions
of
gay
identity
in
the
HIV/AIDS
discourse
in
Serbia.
At
the
beginning
of
the
thesis,
describing
the
context
of
the
Serbian
society
introduces
the
origin
of
the
social
construction
of
sexuality
and
the
rejection
of
it.
In
his
work
‘The
Construction
of
Homosexuality’,
Jeffrey
Weeks
defines
the
importance
of
the
social
context
of
gay
sexuality
and
of
gay
representation
thus:
“...it
is
no
longer
possible
to
talk
of
the
possibility
of
a
universalistic
history
of
homosexuality;
it
is
only
possible
to
understand
the
social
significance
of
homosexual
behaviour,
both
in
terms
of
social
response
and
in
terms
of
individual
identity,
in
its
exact
historical
context.
To
put
it
another
way,
the
various
possibilities
of
same
sex
behaviour
are
variously
constructed
in
different
cultures
as
an
aspect
of
wider
gender
and
sexual
regulation.”4
Weeks
is
also
trying
to
analyse
the
construction
of
sexuality
and
sexual
identity
positions
grounded
in
‘the
discourse
of
choice’
as
the
result
of
collective
or
individual
autonomy.5
Unfortunately,
the
discourse
of
choice
and
sexual
differences
were
deliberately
narrowed
in
Serbia
at
the
beginning
of
the
90s,
when
the
nationalistic
tendencies
in
Yugoslavia
culminated
in
the
outbreak
of
war.
Thus
far,
through
the
Serbian
tendency
to
‘purify’
the
nation
from
the
‘others’
of
any
kind,
the
choice
of
sexual
difference
has
been
narrowed.
The
recent
history
and
the
fall
of
Yugoslavia,
as
well
as
the
rise
of
an
independent
Serbia
through
xenophobic
leaderships
and
interethnic
conflicts
have
been
in
the
spotlight
of
numerous
international
and
domestic
researchers.6
The
rise
of
nationalistic
and
right
wing
policies
has
followed
not
only
that
internal
political
shift,
but
the
global
political
4
See
Jeffrey
Weeks’
‘The
Construction
of
Homosexuality’
in
Seidman,
1996,
p.42
5
See
Plummer,
1993,
pp.
121
-­‐130
6
See
Marković,
2001;
Bowman,
2005;
Jensen,
2005;
Milosavljević,
2006
11

12. change
brought
about
by
the
economic
crisis,
the
collapse
of
welfare
states
and
the
generic
shift
of
policy
to
the
right.
Ann
Marie
Smith
showed
how
populism
operates
when
she
described
the
impact
of
local
political
aspiration
towards
a
universal
mode
of
state
reform
through
the
processes
of
neoliberal
capitalism
and
globalisation.7
The
nationalistic
tendencies
in
the
Serbian
context
and
the
rise
of
populism
and
right-­‐wing
policies,
and
the
opposite
social,
anti-­‐nationalistic
movement
in
Serbia
during
the
90s,
have
marked
major
social
and
political
changes
in
the
traditional
Balkan
societies.8
Taking
the
global
perspective
on
the
processes
of
dismantling
welfare
states
in
the
period
of
post
communism
and
the
uncertainty
of
a
neo-­‐liberal
society
shaken
by
economic
crisis
and
social
tensions,
has
been
the
central
point
of
examination
in
the
work
of
Boris
Buden.9
Buden
refers
to
some
of
the
characteristics
of
post-­‐communist
societies
as
a
result
of
the
‘re-­‐traditionalization’
of
the
past
and
the
role
of
‘liberated’
religion
as
its
integral
part
of
these
characteristics.10
In
the
transition
of
its
society
from
socialism
to
neo-­‐liberal
capitalism,
Serbia
adopted
fully
these
processes
of
re-­‐traditionalization,
emerging
as
a
crucial
case
study
in
this
regard.
Nevertheless,
as
Dimitrije,
the
one
of
the
HIV
positive
gay
men
interviewed
noticed:
Dimitrije
–
Today,
it
seems
that
we
are
going
backwards,
thinking
that
we
are
going
forward
and
every
time
when
we
talk
about
transition
in
society...
transition
is
not
something,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
that
we
can
be
certain
of.
You
might
end
in
deep
in
a
hole
or
you
might
be
on
the
top
of
a
hill
with
a
beautiful
view
and
clean
air.
In
that
search
for
identity
in
society,
if
a
person
is
not
empowered
and
does
not
have
supportive
surroundings...then
such
a
person
will
not
take
care
of
himself.
In
the
case
of
Serbia,
the
reimposition
of
tradition
and
religion
and
the
role
of
religious
communities,
influence
widely
and
deeply
the
institutional
response
to
specific
social
problems.
The
connections
between
HIV/AIDS,
the
gay
sexual
minority
and
religious
fundamentalism
of
any
kind
(Orthodox
Christianity
as
well
as
Islam
and
Catholicism)
at
root
follow
the
logic
of
‘non-­‐acceptance’
and
‘non-­‐tolerance’
of
sexuality
per
se
as
fundamental
human
attribute.
7
Smith,
1997,
p.115
8
Jensen,
2005
9
See
Buden,
2009
10
ibid,
p.89
12

13. The
context
of
Serbian
society
presented
in
the
first
chapter
could
not
be
addressed
fully
without
study
of
the
epidemiological
situation
of
HIV/AIDS
in
Serbia
today.
Those
data
are
showing
the
dynamics
of
the
epidemic
and
the
inadequate
result
of
the
institutional
response
towards
the
spread
of
HIV/AIDS.
The
construction
of
the
main
social
policy
document
about
HIV/AIDS
in
Serbia
from
2005
until
2015,
the
‘National
Strategy
against
HIV/AIDS’
demonstrates
the
same
level
of
inconsistency
toward
the
gay
sexual
minority,
particularly
in
its
estimate
of
the
number
of
gay
people
in
Serbia
and
the
level
of
testing
for
HIV
that
has
been
carried
out
among
them.11
The
epidemiological
data
show
the
increasing
number
of
those
newly
infected,
particularly
among
the
group
of
men
who
have
sex
with
men
–
MSM.12
The
epidemiological
data
are
very
easily
reached
on
the
NGO’s
websites
and
are
thoroughly
updated.13
The
two
major
tendencies
in
the
HIV/AIDS
epidemic
in
Serbia
are
the
following;
firstly,
the
acceleration
in
the
number
of
the
newly
infected,
mostly
among
MSM,
and
secondly,
a
third
of
the
AIDS
cases
(33%)
are
first
diagnosed
in
the
disease’s
terminal
phase.14
The
acceleration
in
the
HIV/AIDS
epidemic
has
doubled,
firstly,
as
the
total
population
of
Serbia
has
decreased
by
some
5%15
since
2002.
Secondly,
the
number
of
cases
of
HIV/AIDS
has
increased,
especially
in
young
adult
males.16
Together
with
the
history
and
the
epidemiological
data
the
first
chapter
also
tackles
an
examination
of
the
educational
discourse
in
Serbia
about
HIV/AIDS.
The
silencing
of
gay
sexuality
is
at
the
core
of
the
aims
of
this
educational
process.
The
official
material
of
the
2nd
Serbian
PLHIV
Conference
provides
an
excellent
example
of
the
claim,17
offering
excellent
proof
as
to
how,
when
religion
comes
to
determine
social
practices,
religion
itself
then
takes
over
the
role
of
society.18
How
is
it
possible
to
provide
the
functions
of
the
state
and
biogovernmentality
in
such
circumstances?
What
about
the
de
facto
life-­‐management
of
minority
groups
that
arises
from
the
hypocrisy
of
the
state
and
society’s
discriminatory
politics?
Such
symbiosis
could
impede
the
ability
to
address
specific
social
questions
such
as
those
to
which
HIV/AIDS
give
rise.
Later
in
the
thesis,
the
case
of
Serbia,
and
the
present
state
of
HIV/AIDS
epidemic
and
gay
minority
in
the
country,
will
show
how
the
unity
of
re-­‐traditionalized
society
and
religion
is
undermining
efforts
to
deal
with
the
problem.
That
pattern
is
also
traced
in
the
processes
of
11
See
http://www.minzdravlja.info/downloads/Zakoni/Strategije/HIVAIDS%20Strategija%202005.pdf
12
See
Rakić
et
al.,
2010;
Ministry
of
Health
of
the
Republic
of
Serbia,
2010;
www.aidsresurs.rs,
2012;
www.jazas.rs,
2012
13
See
www.aidsresurs.rs,
2012;
www.jazas.com,
2012
14
ibid
15
See
www.mediapopis2012.rs
16
Rakić,
2010
17
Vukašinović
et
al.,
2012
18
Buden,
2009,
p.
166
13

14. representation
of
the
gay
sexual
minority
in
Serbia,
as
well
as
the
connection
between
representation
and
sexuality.
Tim
Stüttgen
expresses
this
connection
between
representations
and
sexuality
in
a
letter
to
the
Spanish
feminist
Beatriz
Preciado,
thus:
“Representation,
you
wrote
once,
’belongs
together
with
medical
and
legal
discourses,
to
the
biopolitical
processes
of
normalization
and
control
of
bodies
and
sexuality’.”19
The
context
of
the
Serbian
society,
presented
in
the
first
chapter,
would
not
be
complete
without
the
biomedical
discourse.
The
introduction
of
biomedicine
and
biomedical
structuring
of
subjectivities
around
HIV/AIDS
provide
the
pattern
of
the
implementation
of
biogovernmentality
in
society,
introduced
and
examined
by
Foucault
in
‘The
Birth
of
Biopolitics’,
and
further
developed,
at
the
molecular
levels
of
governing,
in
recent
times.20
The
work
of
Marsha
Rosengarthen
brings
the
biomedical
structuring
of
gay
identity
in
a
society
ruled
by
information
and
HIV/AIDS
control.21
The
body
politics
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
is
controlled
by
ARV
(antiretroviral)
therapy,
as
well
as
their
life
management.22
That
is
why
a
good
structuring
and
framing
of
social
policy
toward
HIV/AIDS
are
very
important
for
the
halting
of
the
epidemic.
The
recent
work
of
some
researchers
is
developing
our
understanding
of
new
social
organisation
around
shared
body
politics
in
the
gay
community.23
The
strategies
of
resistance
and
mimicry
are
guiding
the
gay
sexual
minority
in
Serbia.
Their
body
politics
are
structured
around
the
undetectability
of
the
virus,
and
the
undetectability
of
gay
identity
positions
in
widely
homophobic
and
discriminatory
surroundings.
The
work
of
Joao
Biehl
draws
on
the
biopolitical
and
pharmaceutical
processes
that
shape
identities
in
his
native
Brasil.24
Nevertheless,
the
biomedical
approach
to
HIV/AIDS
in
Brasilian
society
provides
an
insight
as
to
how
identity
politics
has
been
productively
structured
through
relations
against
‘the
other’,
the
virus
and
the
representation
of
‘the
other’.25
Such
identity
politics
is
important
for
similar
situations
worldwide.
For
Rosengarthen,
the
biomedical
construction
of
the
identity
of
HIV
infected
and
the
AIDS
patients
in
the
UK
is
an
inseparable
part
of
the
contemporary
subjectivity
of
the
PLHIV.
The
processes
of
the
pharmaceuticalization
of
AIDS
discourse,
and
the
19
Stüttgen,
2009,
p.
44
20
Using
the
concept
of
the
molecular
level
of
biogoverning
(or
biogovernmentality),
we
have
to
consider
the
level
of
the
‘tube’
and
the
‘tube
testing’
where
the
identity
is
structured
by
positive
or
the
negative
biomedical
test
results
of
any
kind,
eg.
Elisa
testing
on
HIV
antibodies,
PCR
testing
on
HIV,
the
screening
testing
for
CD4
lymphocytes
as
the
marker
of
ARV
efficiency,
etc.,
See
Rose,
2007;
Rosengarthen,
2009;
Biehl,
2009;
Whitacre,
2011
21
ibid
22
Rosengarthen,
2009
23
Biehl,
2009;
Whitacre,
2011
24
Biehl,
2009
25
Rosengarthen,
2009
14

15. introduction
of
ARV
therapy,
are
shaping
new
identity
positions
for
PLHIV.
Nevertheless,
class
and
race
remain
the
defining
factors
of
the
life-­‐management
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
in
Brazil,
UK
and
Serbia
as
well.
The
political
position
espousing
‘therapy
for
all’
is
still
at
the
heart
of
official
social
policy
in
low
income
countries
such
as
Serbia.
Unfortunately
the
present
economic
situation
is
not
conducive
to
such
policy.
The
organisation
of
life
and
the
body
politics
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
have
been
transformed
in
recent
years
by
the
regulatory
mechanism
of
seropositivity
and
the
viral
load.26
The
viral
load
defines
the
body
politics
of
the
carrier
of
the
HIV
and
brings
completely
new
insight
into
gay
social
organisation
in
the
AIDS
discourses.
ARV
therapy
has
brought
new
perspectives
for
HIV
positive
gay
men
and
provides
a
space
for
new
strategies
of
resistance
against
stigmatization
based
on
sexuality
or
illness
or
both.
Through
matching
sexuality
and
sexual
preferences,
HIV
positive
gay
men
are
trying
to
identify
similar
identity
positions
and
thus,
in
some
aspects,
are
aligning
their
everyday
life
practices
and
their
body
politics.
New
insights
into
the
organisation
and
the
life-­‐
management
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
in
specific
social
and
geographical
areas,
such
as
the
San
Francisco
Bay
Area,
has
brought
to
light
the
phenomenon
of
everyday-­‐life
practices
in
a
community
where
gay
sexuality
is
not
a
taboo
anymore.27
Such
insights
could
provide
a
basic
understanding
as
to
how
the
similar
patterns
of
behaviour
operate
in
communities
with
a
high
level
of
discrimination
and
stigmatisation
toward
HIV
positive
gay
men,
such
as
in
Serbian
society.
While
the
silencing
of
gay
sexuality
is
the
Serbian
response
to
gay
issues
(including
HIV/AIDS
among
gay
people
and
other
PLHIV),
visibility
and
recognition
are
the
progressive
factors
being
used,
in
Western
countries,
with
more
or
less
success,
to
address
the
same
issues.
The
second
chapter
addresses
directly
the
gay
sexual
minority
in
Serbia
and
its
recognition
by
and
in
Serbian
society.
The
philosophy
of
recognition,
as
developed
by
Alexander
Garcia-­‐Düttmann,
will
be
used
in
this
chapter.28
Reflecting
on
recognition
as
the
‘question
of
the
voice
of
non-­‐identical’,
Garcia-­‐Düttmann
is
providing
a
starting
point
to
understand
the
processes
of
non-­‐acceptance
(non-­‐recognition)
of
minority
identity.
26
See
Whitacre,
2011,
p.
V:
“Viral
load
is
a
measurement
of
the
amount
of
virus
in
an
organism
and
typically,
in
the
bloodstream.
In
the
case
of
HIV
this
measurement
is
obtained
through
a
viral
load
test,
formally
referred
to
as
the
Human
Immunodeficiency
Virus
RNA
Quantitative
and
is
expressed
in
virus
particles
or
copies
per
milliliter
(copies/mL)
of
blood
plasma.
As
an
important
distinction,
the
HIV
antibody
test,
not
the
HIV
viral
load
test,
is
the
recommended
method
for
the
diagnosis
of
HIV.
The
HIV
viral
load
test
is
used
for
monitoring
the
level
of
virus
after
the
initial
diagnosis
of
HIV.
Knowing
the
viral
load
is
crucial
in
matters
of
prognosis,
prevention
and
the
management
of
HIV
therapy,
but
the
perceptibility
of
the
viral
load
complicates
such
efforts
and
has
the
potential
to
create
scenarios
of
misrepresentation
and
subsequent
misunderstanding.”
27
ibid,
pp.
12-­‐14
28
Garcia-­‐Düttmann,
1996;
Garcia-­‐Düttmann,
2000
15

16. Garcia-­‐Düttmann
states:
“...in
order
to
gain
knowledge
of
what
the
pain
of
the
other
is,
then
the
failing
recognition
or
the
absence
of
a
response
may
suggest
an
absence
of
knowledge
–
an
absence
which
does
not
determine
the
failure
of
recognition...”.29
The
importance
of
recognition
of
the
gay
sexual
minority,
(and
in
its
core
gay
sexuality)
in
Serbia,
is
the
cornerstone
of
any
successful
state
policy
and
politics,
including
policy
about
HIV/AIDS
and
PLHIV.
In
talking
about
the
extent
of
the
influence
of
the
politics
of
recognition,
Garcia-­‐Düttmann
confirms:
“Politics
is
a
politics
of
recognition
to
the
extent
that
self-­‐consciousness,
identity,
difference,
culture,
society,
the
state
and
the
legal
system
cannot
be
formed
and
thought
without
recognition,
whatever
one’s
concept
of
recognition
may
be.”30
The
recognition
of
the
gay
sexual
minority
should
include
the
core
identity
factor
of
recognition;
that
is
–
the
recognition
of
gay
sexuality.
This
is
the
main
problem
for
Serbian
society
and
the
state,
otherwise
the
tumult
over
gay
sexual
minority
rights
in
Serbia
would
not
be
at
the
pitch
that
it
has
been
for
over
two
decades
–
and
that
is
before
even
taking
into
consideration
the
ever-­‐expanding
HIV/AIDS
epidemic.
The
discourse
of
AIDS,
also
prominent
in
the
work
of
Garcia-­‐Düttmann,
problematises
the
body
politics
of
the
gay
sexual
minority
and
wider
social
concepts
organized
around
the
same
discourse.
In
discussing
who,
how,
and
what
is
relevant
in
the
problematisation
of
AIDS,
Garcia-­‐Düttmann
points
out:
“Thinking
and
talking
about
AIDS
cannot
be
detached
from
the
context
of
practical
politics;
they
are
inscribed
in
it
and
create
it
with
the
first
word
and
first
thought”.31
In
this
way,
the
politics
around
HIV
positive
gay
men
in
Serbia
is
inadequate
to
deal
with
two
recognitions:
the
recognition
of
the
virus
(HIV,
and
consequently
AIDS)
at
the
organisational
level,
and
the
recognition
of
gay
sexuality.
The
aim
of
prevention
and
the
numerical
targets
to
achieve
this
that
have
been
missed
are
just
one
element
of
the
failing
politics
of
recognition.
In
1996,
Lewis-­‐Allen
pointed
out
the
relation
between
prevention
and
recognition:
“Prevention
–
even
today
the
most
important
weapon
against
AIDS
by
far
–
continues
to
be
misunderstood,
underfunded,
and
ineffectual;
prejudices
remain.”32
In
fighting
these
patterns
of
prejudices,
discrimination,
and
stigmatisation,
new
approaches
should
introduce
a
different
social
response
than
has
so
far
been
seen.
One
of
the
biggest
challenges
for
Serbian
society
and
the
global
perspective
of
HIV/AIDS
today
is
the
societal
inclusion
of
every
individual
HIV
positive
gay
man
and
the
transformation
of
all
of
the
social
structures
affecting
and
affected
by
HIV/AIDS.
29
Garcia-­‐Düttmann,
2000,
p.9
30
ibid,
p.190
31
Garcia-­‐Düttmann,
1996,
p.49
32
Lewis-­‐Allen,
2000,
p.
127
16

17. Finally,
in
the
third
chapter,
the
interviews
conducted
as
part
of
this
study
are
analysed
and
this
analysis
is
integrated
into
the
theoretical
conceptualization
of
the
previous
two
chapters.
17

18. Chapter
I
1.1
Transitional
Serbian
society
To
examine
the
context
of
the
AIDS
epidemic
in
Serbia
is
unimaginable
without
an
introduction
to
recent
Serbian
history
and
politics.
Serbian
society
has
been
through
very
turbulent
times
in
the
last
two
decades.
As
one
of
the
six
republics
of
the
former
Socialist
Federal
Republic
of
Yugoslavia,
Serbia
gained
its
independence
through
the
bloody
Yugoslav
wars
of
the
1990s.
Initially,
many
historians
saw
the
start
of
the
fall
of
the
Yugoslav
Federation
immediately
after
the
death
of
President
Tito
in
1980.
The
rise
of
nationalism,
as
Bowman
explained,
occurred
as
the
response
to
the
socialist
legacy:
“The
discursive
shift
to
nationalist
discourse
occurred
through
the
intervention
of
republican
politicians
who
created
‘national’
platforms
from
where
they
could
launch
bids
to
increase
their
holds
on
power
in
a
Yugoslav
state
characterised,
after
the
death
of
Tito,
by
a
vacuum
at
the
political
centre”.33
In
trying
to
describe
the
crisis
of
the
Yugoslav
socialist
model
Vladimir
Marković
refers
to
the
1990s
as:
“...years
marked
with
“war
transitions”,
bloody
destruction
of
the
federal
state
and
societal
disintegration.
The
notion
of
the
political
was
commonly
perceived
as
national,
which
was
very
convenient
for
awakening
of
ethnocentric
ressentiment,
the
rediscovery
of
traditional
values
and
the
rise
of
reactionary
right-­‐wing
ideologies”.34
The
rise
to
power
of
Slobodan
Milošević,
who
became
the
Yugoslav
Communist
Party
leader
in
Serbia
in
1987,
and
the
production
of
the
notorious
nationalist
document
–
called
‘Memorandum’
–
by
the
Serbian
Academy
of
Science
and
Arts
in
Belgrade
in
1986,
by
the
end
of
the
1980s
and
throughout
the
1990s
had
become
the
cornerstones
of
nationalistic
Serbian
politics.35
The
political
elites
in
other
republics
of
Former
Yugoslavia,
especially
Slovenia
and
Croatia,
similarly
and
consequently
on
the
Serbian
nationalist
propaganda
and
the
political
establishment,
created
the
similar
nationalist
approaches
and
rhetoric.36
These
events
were
the
precursors
to
the
bloody
war
between
the
nations
and
the
republics
from
1991–1995,
culminating
with
the
end
of
Bosnian
war,
brokered
through
the
Dayton
Peace
Agreement.37
Even
though
war
clashes
were
avoided
directly
on
Serbian
soil,
Serbia
was
very
much
responsible
for
the
war
activities
played
out
by
the
ethno-­‐nationalist
elites,
33
Bowman,
2005,
p.134
34
Marković,
2001,
p.27
35
See
http://www.scribd.com/doc/19499149/Olivera-­‐Milosavljevi-­‐Jugoslavija-­‐kao-­‐zabluda
36
Bowman,
2005,
pp.135-­‐141
37
See
http://www.ohr.int/dpa/default.asp?content_id=379
18

19. especially
in
Bosnia
and
Herzegovina.38
Catalysed
by
the
result
of
the
conflict
between
Serbs
and
Albanians
in
Kosovo,
on
March
24th
1999,
NATO
commenced
its
bombardment
of
Serbia,
which
continued
until
June
10th
1999.39
Alongside
these
developments,
during
the
1990s,
a
strong
anti–nationalistic
movement
had
grown
in
Serbian
society.
40
Jansen
points
out
that
both
Serbian
and
Croatian
nationalisms
were
based
in
the
repression
of
‘the
other’.41
Traditional
Serbian
patriarchal
society
has
found
its
immaculate
imperative
in
the
nationalistic
ideology
of
‘the
purity
of
the
nation’,
and
consequently,
there
is
no
place
for
any
form
of
‘otherness’
that
might
undermine
it.
However,
after
the
defeat
of
Slobodan
Milošević
in
the
election,
and
post-­‐election
revolution
of
the
masses
on
the
streets
of
Belgrade
in
5th
October
2000,
and
as
a
result
of
the
exposure
of
Milošević’s
election
fraud,
Serbia
became
what
can
be
described
as
a
fully
transitional
society.42
The
end
of
socialist
Yugoslavia
and
the
post-­‐revolution
changes
in
various
different
countries
of
Eastern
Europe
at
the
end
of
the
1980s
and
the
beginning
of
1990s,
signalled
the
establishment
of
a
regional
period
of
transition
from
socialism
to
neo-­‐liberal
capitalism.
The
fallen
welfare
states
and
the
economic
insecurity,
encountering
the
same
problems
as
Northern
Europe
and
Northern
America,
are
facing
the
majority
of
people
with
problems
which
they
are
ill-­‐equipped
to
deal
or
cope
with.
In
this
situation,
Serbian
society
is
no
exception.
As
a
World
Bank
study
in
2005
exposed:
“Poverty
rose
sharply
in
the
1990s
and
remains
widespread.
Using
a
poverty
threshold
level
of
2.40€
a
day
finds
that
11
percent
of
the
Serbian
population
falls
below
the
poverty
line.”43
Economic
insecurity
has
followed
a
deeply
unstable
political
situation.
After
the
fall
of
the
regime
of
Slobodan
Milošević
in
October
2000,
the
government
of
the
Prime
Minister
Zoran
Djindjić
(2001–2003)
was
pursuing,
transparently,
a
path
to
a
democratic
Serbian
society
where
human
rights,
including
minority
rights,
would
have
been
high
in
the
list
of
the
priorities
of
social
reorganisation.
Recovering
from
the
wars
and
the
unstable
economic
and
political
situation
and
even
in
just
two
years,
Serbian
society
had
made
some
significant
progress
towards
the
path
of
a
democratic
society
with
respect
to
basic
human
rights.
However,
in
March
2003,
the
assassination
of
Prime
Minister
Djinjić
in
Belgrade,
slowed
and,
in
some
aspects,
reversed
these
attempts
at
democratic
progress,
driving
a
reversion
towards
revisionist
nationalistic
rhetoric
and
politics,
and
the
return
of
uncertainty
to
the
political
and
social
system
in
Serbia.44
38
See
http://www.opendemocracy.net/globalization-­‐institutions_government/icj_bosnia_serbia_4392.jsp
39
See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/special_report/1998/kosovo/312003.stm
40
Jansen,
2005
41
ibid,
2005,
p.85
42
See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/europe/2000/milosevic_yugoslavia/downfall.stm
43
Godinho
et
al.,
2005,
p.122
44
See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2843433.stm
19

20. In
the
21st
century,
following
not
only
the
local,
but
the
global
reality
of
failing
welfare
states
and
the
rise
of
economic
and
ethnic
tensions,
Serbia
has
experienced
‘democratic’
governments
which
have
shown
enormous
shifts
to
the
right
of
ideology
and
policy.
Following
the
intensification
of
the
global
economic
crisis
since
2007,
populism
has
been
on
the
rise.
As
a
political
strategy
and
tactic,
ever-­‐increasing
populism
has
been
a
key
tool
to
gain
power
in
nations
where
citizens
are
weakened
by
years
of
wars,
uncertainty
and
poor
economic
development.
The
transformation
of
Serbian
society
seems
to
be
uniting
nationalist
and
traditional
tendencies
with
the
European
Union
policy.
On
the
1st
March
2012
Serbia
gained
the
status
of
the
candidacy
for
the
EU
membership.45
When
there
is
no
external
enemy,
there
is
always
somebody
to
remind
the
people
of
the
purity
of
the
family,
the
nation
and
the
‘motherland’.
As
different
analyses
demonstrate,
this
instability
is
still
present
in
Serbia:
“Although
the
acute
phase
of
war
may
have
ended,
tensions
continue
over
many
matters;
for
example:
Kosovo’s
recent
declaration
of
independence
from
Serbia;
tribunals;
the
status
of
refugees
and
returnees;
poverty;
instability
of
legal
institutions;
lack
of
health
and
social
services;
lack
of
opportunities
for
new
ways
of
knowing,
potential
for
involvement
in
societal
reorganization,
and
for
critical
thinking”.46
Since,
at
the
level
of
rhetoric
and
its
publication,
all
the
conflicts
between
former
Yugoslav
nations
and
states
are
no
longer
‘politically
correct’
and
since
all
of
these
states
are
influenced
by
the
qualitative
lurch
in
the
economic
crisis
that
became
most
strongly
visible
in
2007,
the
easiest
way
to
base
populist
policy
on
the
creation
of
new
threats
to
the
national
interest
in
the
form
of
‘the
other’.
Sexual
minorities
and
other
ethnic
minorities,
such
as,
for
example,
Roma
people
are
among
the
first
to
be
labelled
as
‘different’
in
Serbian
society
and
therefore
to
come
under
threat
of
fascist
actions.
As
Anna
Marie
Smith
defined:
“A
hegemonic
authoritarian
project
must
provide
the
necessary
structures
for
these
contradictory
identifications.
A
total
exclusion
of
the
demonized
figure
may
weaken
the
authoritarian
project’s
claim
to
universality.
It
must
pretend
to
accommodate
virtually
every
legitimate
social
element;
it
must
appear
to
be
utterly
unaffected
by
the
multiplication
of
new
social
differences.
At
the
same
time,
it
must
pursue
populist
strategies.
It
must
mobilize
and
reproduce
the
reactionary
forces
that
provide
its
political
momentum.
It
must
also
drag
the
political
centre
so
far
to
the
right
that
the
conservative
elements
within
the
centrist
and
centre-­‐
left
parties
become
more
prominent
and
move
their
parties
to
the
right.
This
in
turn
contributes
to
the
increasing
alienation
among
the
voters
who
traditionally
support
the
centre-­‐left
and
leftist
parties,
such
as
progressive
lesbians
and
gays,
workers,
blacks,
and
feminists.
Ultimately,
the
authoritarian
populism
of
the
new
right
and
the
45
See
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-­‐europe-­‐17225415
46
Daiute,
2010,
p.
23
20

21. neoconservatives
is
itself
contradictory
since
it
depends
simultaneously
on
the
permanent
mobilization
of
a
small
cadre
of
right-­‐wing
voters
and
the
virtual
disenfranchisement
of
the
majority
of
the
electorate.”47
In
addressing
the
topic
of
contemporary
fascism
and
its
political
continuing
manifestation,
Marković
posits
its
resurgence
on
the
‘ideological
crisis
of
the
West’
and
admits
that
the
survival
of
fascism
globally
is
occurring
through
very
subtle
and
disguised
adaptations.48
In
Serbia,
as
well
as
in
the
other
republics
of
ex-­‐Yugoslavia,
the
ideology
of
neoliberal
capitalism
has
gained
the
substantial
power
it
has
in
combination
with
a
‘transitional’
hybrid
social
system.
49
This
socio-­‐political
ground
has
been
and
continues
to
be
very
productive
for
the
‘disguised’
fascism
and
national-­‐socialist
tendencies
targeting
‘others’
among
the
population,
especially
sexual
minorities.
Yet
the
process
of
becoming
a
full
member
of
EU
has
put
Serbia
constantly
in
the
spotlight
vis
a
vis
having
to
negotiate
national
interests
under
scrutiny.
One
of
the
crucial
moments
in
the
recent
political
developments
in
Serbia
was
Parliament’s
vote
for
the
Anti-­‐discriminatory
law
in
2009.
The
deputies
voted
on
26th
March
2009,
with
the
majority
of
127
votes
in
250
seats
Parliament
for
the
Anti-­‐
discriminatory
law
in
which
are
addressed
issues
of
equality
and
which
makes
illegal
discrimination
of
any
kind.50
Nevertheless,
in
the
same
debate,
an
amendment
to
the
penal
code
which
would
have
explicitly
outlawed
discrimination
of
PLHIV
and
their
families
was
rejected.51
In
2009,
a
parliamentary
group
of
9
members
of
the
Parliament
came
together
to
lobby
the
Serbian
Parliament
and
parliamentarians
on
HIV/AIDS
and
the
reproductive
health
issues.
There
has
been
no
achievement
around
this
issue
but
mere
paying
of
the
lip
service
and
showing
off
of
political
correctness.
It
is
expected
that
the
Parliamentary
group
will
continue
its
work
in
the
newly
formed
National
Assembly
which
commenced
its
term
of
office
in
July
2012.
It
would
be
productive
if
the
Parliament
focused
its
attention
on
regulations
concerning
sexual
and
reproductive
health
education
in
schools.
Nonetheless,
today
in
Serbia,
the
question
of
the
implementation
of
existing
law
and
how
the
legislature
deals
with
this,
is
the
crux
of
the
matter
for
vulnerable
social
groups.52
The
Ministry
of
Health
of
the
Republic
of
Serbia
has
a
track
record
of
5
years
of
strategic
responses
in
dealing
with
HIV/AIDS
issues
and
is
providing
the
guidance
through
its
cornerstone
document
–
called
‘National
strategy
for
the
responses
to
HIV
47
Smith,
1997,
p.115
48
Marković,
2002,
p.23
49
Buden,
2011,
pp.72-­‐82
50
www.aidsresurs.com
51
See
www.q-­‐club/org.rs/sr/view/vesti?page=4
52
Dimitrijević
et
al.,
2010,
pp.
9-­‐31
21

22. infection
and
AIDS’
which
was
put
in
place
from
2005
onward.53
The
regulatory
body
of
the
politics
around
the
AIDS
epidemic
and
HIV
infection
in
Serbia
is
the
Republic
National
AIDS
Committee
(RAC)
formed
in
2001.54
The
chairing
of
the
RAC
is
the
responsibility
of
the
Ministry
of
Health
of
the
Republic
of
Serbia,
with
the
participation
of
some
other
Ministries
(
Education,
Work
&
Social
Policy,
Internal
Affairs,
Defence,
Youth
&
Sport)
and
from
the
civil
sector,
NGO’s
dealing
with
PLHIV,
health
institutions,
the
media,
and
some
international
agencies
such
as
UNAIDS,
UNICEF,
UNDP,
etc.55
Through
the
medical
and
the
educational
systems,
collectively,
those
institutions
are
supposed
to
be
the
enactors
of
the
processes
of
the
biogovernmentality
and
pharmaceuticalization
of
public
health
where
HIV/AIDS
are
concerned.
There
have
been
cursory
references
to
address
the
challenges
of
the
gay
sexual
minority
and
of
HIV/AIDS56
that
show
little
serious
intent,
beyond
using
the
‘politically
correct’
rhetoric.
Even
those
initiatives
funded
by
international
organisations,
such
as
UNICEF,
are
well-­‐intentioned
but
feeble
and
inadequate.
Among
recent
publications,
there
is
only
one
addressing
the
behaviour
of
MSM
–
a
piece
of
work
that
was
carried
out
by
the
Ministry
of
Health
in
September
2010.57
These
studies
were
starting
point
for
the
creation
of
the
‘National
Strategy
against
HIV/AIDS’
document,
laying
out,
as
it
was
supposed
to
do,
the
basis
upon
which
Parliament
intended
to
carry
out
its
mandate;
to
lead
the
response
of
the
state
to
the
prevalence
and
growth
of
HIV/AIDS
up
until
2015.58
However,
in
July
2012,
Serbia
elected
a
new,
right-­‐wing
President
and
a
strongly
right-­‐wing
coalition
government
to
lead
the
country.59
Even
whilst
legal
frameworks
in
Europe
and
North
America
are
opening
their
systems
up
to
anti-­‐discriminatory
policy60,
in
Serbia,
even
at
this
point
–
when
the
Serbian
legislature
is
expected
to
follow
EU
regulations
in
practice
–
in
the
everyday
life
of
its
citizens,
such
policies
as
exist
are
not
being
implemented.61
Discriminatory
practices
and
stigmatisation
are
widespread
in
Serbia,
especially
against
some
social
groups
like
Roma
people
and
the
gay
sexual
minority.62
The
materials
of
the
right-­‐wing
organisations
show
the
present
state
of
non-­‐acceptance
and
non-­‐tolerance
of
sexual
differences
and,
in
their
particular
use
of
quasi-­‐scientific
and
semi-­‐religious
language,
are
53
See
http://www.minzdravlja.info/downloads/Zakoni/Strategije/HIVAIDS%20Strategija%202005.pdf
54
Godinho
et
al.
2006,
p.
132
55
ibid,
p.15
56
Cucić,
2002,
p.15
57
Rakić
et
al.,
2010
58
See
http://www.minzdravlja.info/downloads/Zakoni/Strategije/HIVAIDS%20Strategija%202005.pdf
59See
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/21/serbian-­‐lawyers-­‐aides-­‐karadzic-­‐mladic
60
See
Beger,
1996;
Rayside,
1998;
Herman,
2000;
Watney,
2000;
Dorais,
2010
61
See
Gajin
et
al.,
2007;
Dimitrijević
et
al.,
2010
62
See
Cucić,
2002;
Gajin
et
al.,
2007;
Rakić,
2010;
Ministry
of
Health
of
the
Republic
of
Serbia,
2010;
http://gsa.org.rs/2012/05/godisnji-­‐izvestaj-­‐2011/
22

23. trying
to
portray
homosexuality
as
a
disease,
or
a
fashion
trend,
which
is
a
threat
to
both
society’s
fragile
youth
and
the
unity
of
the
nation.63
In
his
famous
article
‘The
Ideology
of
Homosexuality’,
first
published
in
the
‘New
Serbian
Political
Thought’
on-­‐line
magazine,
and
before
being
printed
in
the
magazine
Pečat,
Glišić
has
referred
to
homosexuality
in
general
as
a
concept
whose
‘totalitarian
intolerance’64
should
not
be
tolerated
within
society
because
it
is
extremely
‘anti-­‐social,
aggressive,
a
betrayal
and
on
top
of
everything
else
promotes
the
consumer
society’.65
The
only
possible
defender
against
such
‘intolerant
totality’
is
a
‘healthy
society’
where
there
is
no
place
for
such
an
unhealthy
practice
as
homosexuality.66
Particularly
when
considering
the
stigmatisation
of
HIV
positive
gay
men
vis
a
vis
illness,
it
is
very
significant
to
see
how
this
‘scientific’
approach
attempts
to
define
the
notion
of
‘healthy/non-­‐healthy’.67
Homosexuality,
here,
is
perceived
as
undermining
a
healthy
society’s
safety
through
the
‘unhealthy’
practice
of
the
individual.
Consequently
it
should
not
be
tolerated
by
society.
In
this
time
of
crisis
within
the
post-­‐communist
East
and
the
neo-­‐liberal
West,
when
the
preservation
of
the
family,
nation,
religion
and
welfare
states
is
seen
to
be
under
threat,
any
attempt
even
to
acknowledge
the
existence
of
‘otherness’
is
beyond
contemplation.68
In
his
article,
‘Soft
Occupation’,
Antonić
expresses
opinion
that
the
West
is
responsible
for
the
simplification
of
the
anti-­‐globalist
scene
in
Serbia.
According
to
him,
such
simplification
arises
as
the
result
of
the
state
persecution
of
several
fascistic
organisations.69
This
is,
of
course,
the
way
such
right-­‐wing
thinkers
promote
and
give
rationale
for
the
existence
of
fascist
organisations.
LGBT
activists
and
their
organisations
are
the
‘usual
suspects’
in
such
circumstances.
Marko
Živković
explains
a
similar
pattern
of
behaviour
in
Serbia
in
his
work
on
‘the
other’
in
the
unified
social
matrix
of
the
wartime
Serbian
society
of
the
1990s.70
In
his
text
‘Ex-­‐Yugoslav
Masculinities
under
the
Female
Gaze,
or
Why
Men
Skin
Cats,
Beat
up
Gays
and
Go
to
War’,
he
attempts
to
address
the
issues
of
the
gay
community
and
gay
sexuality
in
the
media,
but
deals
mostly
with
the
normativisation
of
gay
subjectivity.71
One
fundamental
mistake
made
by
rightists,
as
well
as
some
LGBT
organisations
in
Serbia,
is
in
the
use
of
the
term
‘gay
sexual
minority’
as
a
unifying
concept
for
gay
people.
This
was
only
recently
addressed
by
some
gay
activists
through
63
See
Antonić,
2009;
Glišić,
2009;
www.NSPM.com,
2011
64
Glišić,
2009,
p.17
65
ibid,
p.16
66
ibid,
2009,
pp.15-­‐17
67
The
persistence
of
the
attitude
/
belief
that
homosexuality
is
a
psychiatric
illness
(a
deviance),
and
the
notion
that
HIV/AIDS
is
a
form
of
punishment
for
deviant
sexual
behaviour,
is
at
the
root
of
the
rightists’
discourse
around
HIV/AIDS
and
homosexuality
in
Serbia.
68
Buden,
2009
69
Antonić,
2009,
pp.
8-­‐10;
Antonić,
2010
70
Živković,
2006
71
Skrozza,
2009,
pp.
15-­‐17
23

24. their
efforts
to
explain
the
failure
of
the
organisation
of
the
LGBT
Parade
in
2011.72
Unfortunately,
rare
gay
publications,
such
as
‘Optimist’,
are
still
failing
to
accept
that
gay
sexual
minority
is
a
heterogeneous
group.
As
for
the
editors
and
authors
included
in
this
publication,
patronising
messages
to
its
readers
about
body
image,
the
political
implications
of
gay
issues,
gay
life-­‐style
and
behaviour,
simply
reflect
the
poverty
of
their
ideas
and
their
lack
of
perception
of
the
diversity
of
gay
people
in
Serbia.
This
is
just
the
other
side
of
the
coin
which
is
to
be
found
in
the
response
(and
absence
of
it)
from
state
institutions
to
the
challenges
of
HIV/AIDS
among
gay
people.
This
is
most
obviously
apparent
in
the
silencing
and
the
rejection
of
gay
sexuality.
This
rejection
also
persists
in
the
gay
sexual
minority
itself,
especially
if
a
person
is
HIV
positive.
That
is
why
the
body
politics
of
‘health’
mimicry
is
influencing
the
increase
of
HIV
infections
and
the
spread
of
the
AIDS
epidemic.
What
these
attempts
have
in
common
with
the
state
policies
towards
the
gay
sexual
minority
in
Serbia,
is
the
woefully
inadequate
sexual
education
that
still
prevails.
Indeed,
this
was
identified
by
those
interviewed
for
this
thesis
as
the
biggest
problem
in
Serbian
society.
Vladimir
-­‐
V:
I
would
like
to
change
a
lot.
It
is
outrageous
that
some
academic
books
still
in
use
continue
to
identify
homosexuality
as
a
disease;
e.g.
as
number
of
psychiatric
text
books
do.
Campaigns
that
are
supposed
to
focus
on
protection
against
STDs
are
always
very
general,
and
take
as
their
starting
point
the
presupposition
that
the
whole
of
the
population
is
heterosexual.
Z:
With
the
nuclear
heterosexual
family
at
its
centre?
V:
Yes.
The
immediate
target
population
is
heterosexual
and
that
is
taken
for
granted.
There
is
a
lack
of
specific
information
relating
to
specific
social
groups;
gay
people
for
example,
with
all
references
to
vaginal
sexual
intercourse
without
any
mention
of
anal
sexual
intercourse.
I
would
say
that
anal
intercourse
is
not
only
a
sexual
practice
of
gay
people,
but
of
heterosexuals
as
well.
The
same
goes
for
risky
behaviour.
We
should
also
be
provided
with
positive
attitudes
in
this
information.
Distinction
should
also
be
made
between
prevention
from
becoming
infected
with
HIV
and,
having
been
infected,
living
with
HIV.
Education
should
not
be
scary
because
you
have
to
motivate
someone
to
act.
You
should
start
some
process
that
will
encourage
understanding
rather
than
rejection,
and
if
you
discover
a
72
Milićević,
2011,
pp.181-­‐184
24

25. positive
attitude
in
somebody
you
should
not
shatter
it.
You
should
present
the
perspective
that,
with
ARVs,
life
can
go
on
with
HIV.
The
other
thing
is
the
need
for
education
among
the
gay
population.
The
majority
of
the
Serbian
population
usually
associate
gay
people
with
HIV.
People
think
that,
if
you
have
HIV/AIDS,
your
sexual
life
should
end.
I
often
ask
if
they
would
have
sex
with
someone
who
is
HIV
positive
and
am
also
asked
the
same
question
in
turn?
My
answer
is
‘yes’,
and
their
reaction
to
that
is
always
shocking.
I
then
go
further
and
ask
them
why
it
is
that
they
use
the
condom
during
the
intercourse,
and
say
that
this
is
because
every
sexual
partner
they
have
could
be
an
HIV
carrier.
I
tell
them
they
are
somehow
even
safer
if
they
know
that
the
person
they
are
sleeping
with
is
HIV
positive,
which
in
turn
should
make
them
use
full
protection
and
take
every
precaution.
Natasa
and
Violeta
-­‐
N:
We
should
instigate
a
completely
new
educational
process,
starting
with
the
dismantling
of
the
existing
one!
There
has
to
be
a
systematic
approach
to
education
which
means
that
you
accept
that
you
cannot
transform
someone
by
simply
making
them
undergo
a
simple
training
and
assuming
the
job
is
done.
Education
is
a
process
and
it
should
be
tackled
as
such.
When
people
seem
to
change
their
attitudes
after
one
training,
we
are
very
proud
of
such
an
achievement.
But
actually
it’s
much
harder
for
people
to
make
a
true
change
in
their
attitudes
rather
than
to
learn
superficially
some
new
information
or
to
become
familiar
with
it.
We
tried
to
educate
some
health
workers;
they
appeared
to
learn
something
and
returned
to
their
duties,
but
nothing
changed
in
practice.
That’s
the
problem,
it’s
pointless.
It’s
an
investment
of
time,
effort
and
money
but
they
don’t
use
it.
State
institutions
are
very
immune
to
change.
When
health
staff
return
to
their
duties,
it’s
‘business
as
usual’.
V:
When
we
are
talking
about
education
...
if
that
education
is
not
supported
outside
of
the
learning
context,
then
we
haven’t
achieved
any
results.
If
we
want
to
change
various
attitudes,
then
there
are
some
necessary
conditions
for
that
to
happen,
like
at
policy
level
and
in
the
community.
Education
has
to
go
hand
in
hand
with
the
implementation
of
the
new
knowledge
acquired.
At
the
moment,
education
is
organised
for
people
and
that’s
it.
We
don’t
care
25