ABSTRACT
The divisions and categories that have been developed to manage our understanding of the confusing, multifaceted epidemic of the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) have often been problematic and always insufficient. In the early 1980s, the acronym AIDS replaced gayrelated immune disease (GRID). Soon after, AIDS was cleaved into two categories with the introduction of AIDS-related complex (ARC) (Centers for Disease Control, 1987). The imprecision of A R C was gradually supplanted by the more descriptive label, asymptomatic HIV positive. At this point, categorical distinctions were established between absence or presence of illness. Opportunistic infections (OIs) became the defining parameter. This narrow focus, by definition, could not accommodate the emotional and interpersonal complexities that bridge the terms. Emblematic of this binary view, medically diagnosed opportunistic infections ultimately became the sole criterion for the access of benefits and government resources for HIV-positive people until 1993, when a CD-4 count below 200/microL qualified as AIDS (Centers for Disease Control, 1992). For the time, a decisive action had been taken to classify the effects of HIV/ AIDS-a symbolic divide and conquer.
