An Interview by Jack Nichols
 Michael Petrelis
Photo: Rick Gerharter,
2000 |
Michael Petrelis, one of the earliest AIDS activists,
was a co-founder, along with New York's Marty Robinson and Bill
Bahlman of The Lavender Hill Mob, a forerunner to ACT UP.
Out for Good, a gay history book by two
New York Times reporters, says of Michael Petrelis
that in the mid-1980s he'd once played a pivotal role developing a
grassroots activist movement. His actions often become mainstream
news stories, frequently because he is at odds with gay and AIDS
leaders. |
Like a good agitator, Petrelis has championed causes and issues
that would have otherwise gone without attention, had he not brought media
and community focus to a host of concerns. He journeyed twice to Japan to
secure justice for the brutal murder of U.S. gay sailor Allen Schindler.
He's organized boycotts against Miller and Marlboro products
because their parent company, Philip Morris, was the largest corporate
donor to Senator Jesse Helms. Not to mention boycotts against Florida
orange juice when growers hired Rush Limbaugh as a spokesperson, and the
Coors Brewery for its donations to antigay think tanks.
Courting controversy, Petrelis was named by The
Advocate as "America's Nastiest Activist" for his political
efforts. Keeping a watchful and statistical eye on the issues, Michael's
commentaries have been quoted regularly in the mainstream press.
Indefatigable, he has exposed moneyed AIDS villains, among whom he
lists the executive director of the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, Pat
Christian, because she receives a $210,000 annual salary at a time when
thousands of people living with HIV and AIDS need housing subsidies.
An earlier web site of his, the http://www.accountabilityproject.com/,
was launched to provide patients and the public with IRS Form 990 tax
returns from AIDS service providers. Needless to say, the AIDS industry
views him as an adversary.
Michael Petrelis is still considered--as he was in the mid-1980s--
a movement radical, one who has proved adept at keeping today's AIDS
profiteers uneasily on their toes.
Jack Nichols: Michael, the history book,
Out for Good, written by Adam Nagourney and Dudley
Clendinen, says that intense rivalries existed in 1986- 1987 when ACT UP
was getting off the ground in Manhattan. What did you think of the book
and the people in it?
Michael Petrelis: The book had a
"we weren't there" quality that showed through and was a detriment to
capturing our modern American homosexual history. I didn't like being
called "pudgy" in the book and felt a bitterness from the authors toward
many of the activists' characters in its pages.
My friend and co-founder of The Mob and ACT UP, deejay Bill
Bahlman, was described dismissively as "a string bean." I hope other books
are written about this important time in our history by journalists who
were there because Out for Good was as dry as toast.
Jack Nichols: I dumped a scathing
review on Out for Good, partly because of the childish way its authors
described many pioneers' unflattering physical characteristics. They were
very unkind to Marty Robinson's memory and his important activist work.
Michael Petrelis: Marty Robinson
was an integral part of the NYC movement in the 1960s and Nagourney and
Clendinen didn't interview him before he passed away from AIDS. As
Times reporters I don't think either writer can grasp the
importance of street activists like Marty. Too much of the book focused on
mainstream accomodationist leaders, and radicals were dismissed.
| Jack Nichols: You're famous for keeping
the media aware of how certain AIDS moguls--the heads of major
support groups from San Juan to San Francisco itself--have used
significant AIDS funding to finance their own trips to exotic
vacation areas, etc. What have been some of the major controversies
you've entered about these junkets and the like?
Michael Petrelis: Without
question, the AIDS fraud scandal in San Juan is at the top of the
list. In the early 1990s administrators at an AIDS institute
diverted $2.5 million in Ryan White Care Act money away from direct
services like medicines and food. The funds instead paid for
political campaigns and luxury cars. |
Related Articles from the
GayToday Archive:
ReviewOUT
for GOOD By Dudley Clendinen and Adam Nagourney
Marty
Robinson: Mr. Zap!
AIDS
Is World War III
Related Sites:
Account Ability
Project
Account Ability Project
GayToday does not endorse
related sites. |
Despite years of complaints from patients and their advocates in
Puerto Rico, the U.S. Congress ignored the AIDS fraud. Prosecutors
eventually brought charges against the bureaucrats, and after lengthy
trials, half a dozen people have been convicted and sentenced to jail. My
sense is that this case is just the tip of the AIDS corruption iceberg.
Jack Nichols: You recently got
royally under the skin of the San Francisco Health Department when it
seemed to deliberately inflate its statistics purporting to show that AIDS
was on the rise among gay men in The City. What tipped you off to the
implications of this lie?
Michael Petrelis: Years of
collected research, annual AIDS reports, monthly STD reports and minutes
from the San Francisco Ryan White and HIV prevention councils showed
contradictory information. For example, the April Ryan White council
minutes show Dr. Willi McFarland, the city's AIDS epidemiologist, made a
presentation about the endemic levels of HIV here. Endemic means flat or
stable. So in April we are at endemic rates of HIV infection, but by late
June McFarland was quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle alleging the city
had surged to "sub-Saharan African levels of HIV transmission."
To his credit, McFarland back away from such allegations after many
questions were raised about his research. Unfortunately, his earlier quote
had already traveled around the world three times. But the questions about
the HIV numbers in San Francisco have not gone away and there is much
skepticism about the motives of AIDS authorities.
Jack Nichols: Why do you think
the Health Department officials gave out these false statistics? As I
recall they were picked up by both of San Francisco's major newspapers and
then the phony statistics were parlayed into newspapers afar.
Michael Petrelis: It seems to
come down to money. San Francisco has received millions of federal dollars
based on number of AIDS deaths, under the old way of appropriating for
care and prevention services. But Republicans in the House have proposed
basing funding on number of HIV infections, particularly living cases. I
think the health department inflated the HIV rates when they did because
millions of dollars in federal funding was at stake.
If the HIV infections in San Francisco are indeed truly climbing, I
would be the first to say get more money for prevention programs. But the
health department must recognize the "voodoo epidemiology" nature of its
HIV allegations. It appears as though the only way we will know the real
number of HIV infections is through HIV names reporting.
Jack Nichols: There are, it
seems, plenty of folks still dependent on the funds distributed by Ryan
White Care Act. Especially in the boonies. What do you think about the
general level of decent usage made nationwide by people who administer
these funds? They pay for the medicines that many uninsured people lack,
for example, right? But what else? Is there another side?
Michael Petrelis: The bloated
AIDS industry in San Francisco receives twice the amount per patient in
Ryan White funding than any other city. As you can imagine, the industry
is very interested in keeping that money flowing. At the same time, AIDS
patients and newly infection HIV positives in states like Kentucky and
Oklahoma languish on waiting lists for AIDS medicines and care.
If both the House and Senate agree to pass the version of the Ryan
White Care Act that mandates more equitable distribution of federal funds
based on new cases, than more money would shift to the boonies.
Frankly, San Francisco AIDS bureaucrats could easily offset
relative minor reductions of federal funds if they scaled back their high
six figure salaries and lavish spending habits. We are blessed here with
private funding streams like the AIDS Walk and California AIDS Ride to
supplement federal money. In order words, we could survive a cut in Ryan
White money through help from AIDS benefits that happen all the time here.
Unlike Kentucky where you don't have a wealthy gay community
concentrated in one neighborhood used to opening the checkbook to donate
money.
Jack Nichols: Wouldn't the
public's awareness that AIDS funds are much mismanaged tend to work
mischief in Congress and elsewhere among those far-right zealots who favor
eliminating Ryan White and AIDS funding altogether?
Michael Petrelis: We should be
worried the funds are mismanaged and not reaching AIDS patients, which
hurts them. If Congress had mandated more accountability and scrutiny of
what happens to AIDS money when it reaches the local level, maybe we
wouldn't see fraud like we do in Puerto Rico.
If the question is keep quiet about the AIDS fraud or try and end
the corruption, with Congress paying attention to efforts to clean up the
AIDS industry, I say let's go with the latter. After all, the
mismanagement is detrimental to the survival of patients.
Jack Nichols: You have been known
to be allied, if I'm not mistaken, with other AIDS dissidents and yet you
do not share their "denialist" views about HIV. Am I correct? Tell me how
you differ from them. How do you regard the importance or non-importance
of their anti-HIV efforts?
Michael Petrelis: I believe HIV
is the cause of AIDS, but I am friends with members of ACT UP San
Francisco. They don't think HIV is the cause of AIDS and despite our
differences on these causal issues, we have worked together on a few
matters. I do think everything about AIDS in America must always be
re-evaluated, including the cause, and ACT UP San Francisco through
dramatic tactics is getting media to examine their views.
I found last year when I proposed a bathhouse ballot initiative to
reopen the baths that ACT UP San Francisco was the only group willing to
gather signatures every day on the streets. The AIDS industry felt their
decision to close the baths was made in 1984 and the prohibition should
stay in place. Even though the health department lacked evidence showing
bathhouses spread HIV, officials maintained baths were bad.
Well, San Francisco is supposedly facing sub-Saharan levels of HIV
and the baths have been shuttered for more than 15 years. How can we
experience a surge of HIV when there are no baths? Logic says we should
examine HIV prevention in light of such allegations, but the only folks
really saying and demanding a debate about HIV, its cause and spread, and
prevention efforts in San Francisco is ACT UP. Someone has to hold the
AIDS industry accountable for its actions.
Jack Nichols: You haven't burned
out after all these years of AIDS activism. Can you briefly tell GayToday
readers how you see the larger history of AIDS issues as matters have
unfolded since you became active?
Michael Petrelis: I am too much
an optimist to burn out. Besides, I have lived through the worst of the
AIDS crisis and am so happy to be alive. In a way, so much has not
changed. We are still debating the cause, how to treat HIV, ways to stop
it, how to pay for prevention and treatment, etc. I see cycles of
attention to key issues, like bathhouses in San Francisco, ebb and flow,
but never really go away. Just like the concerns about federal funding and
accountability.
All along since AIDS hit the gay community in 1981, we have
demanded more and more money from the government. That hasn't changed and
I think Congress and taxpayers are asking what the billions of AIDS
dollars have bought the country when AIDS fraud grows more widespread and
HIV prevention in San Francisco, if you believe the allegations of
sub-Saharan levels of HIV, is failing. Tough questions without easy
answers.
Jack Nichols: You've been a
longtime advocate for the reopening of the baths in San Francisco. As I
recall, in the past, some of the nation's best known baths, at least,
became also some of the best AIDS awareness centers anywhere, making
condoms available, holding safe-sex demonstrations, emphasizing health and
fitness generally.
I, myself, have never been convinced that a person desiring sex is
at greater risk at the baths than he is when, after a few drinks, he takes
someone home from a bar. Especially since the old baths offered safe-sex
education as a front lobby affair. Safe sex is safe sex, after all, and it
can be practiced or not practiced anywhere.
What are your views on the baths? What impels you to ask the
authorities to get them opened again?
Michael Petrelis: Honestly, I am
sick of traveling to either Berkeley or San Jose to enjoy the pleasures of
a bathhouse. Both Bay Area cities have great baths and if you go you will
run into so many men from San Francisco! I want to reopen the baths in San
Francisco because I prefer the privacy of cubicles to the circus-like
atmosphere of sex clubs here.
Even though there are wash up facilities at sex clubs, I want full
showers, hot tubs, dry saunas, steam rooms, rooms with doors. And let's
not forget about safe sex information and plenty of water based lubes to
use with penile and anal condoms.
By the way, neither Berkeley nor San Jose is experiencing surging
rates of HIV, especially among gays. Yet, San Francisco which doesn't have
a single bathhouse, is alleging out-of-control in terms of its infection
rate. I think there is a connection to be made here.
Jack Nichols: Barebacking. Big
interest in it is shown on the Internet. What is your view of this
phenomenon?
Michael Petrelis: Sex without
condoms has always been with us and always will. We recently have outed
two men in San Francisco paid by the Centers for Disease Control to run
HIV prevention programs with the message of a condom every time for every
sex act. These CDC prevention workers, Keith Folger of the Stop AIDS
Project and Vince Gaither of the HIV Prevention Planning Council, were
telling other gays to always use rubbers, but Folger and Gaither were
advertising on bareback web sites.
I think individuals should make their own decisions about safe sex
and how to practice it. However, I have a problem with the CDC paying gays
in San Francisco to preach one message, but practice something else
entirely.
I don't think anyone wants to consciously contract any STD,
including HIV. I never believed those stories about so-called "bug
chasers." Seems to me a lot of queer academics needed something new to
write about and they fueled many of the stories about this supposed
phenomenon.
Jack Nichols: Who are you voting
for in the presidential race this year?
Michael Petrelis: Why, Ralph
Nader, of course! I have never bought the argument of voting for the
lessor of evils. I want to help build a third party in this country
because the Democrats and GOP are really opposite sides of the same coin.
I will grant you Al Gore is moderately better than George Bush, but that
is not enough for me to pull the lever for Gore.
Green Party Presidential
candidate Ralph Nader |
When
gay Democrats bring up Nader's "gonadal politics" quote of 1996 as a
way of saying he is not our friend, I chuckle. See, I remember in
1992 raising the issue of how Clinton as Arkansas attorney general
in 1977 allowed a queer-specific sodomy law to be enacted. Yet, gay
leaders in 1992 said Clinton would be gay friendly if we elected
him. Why was Clinton's rotten gay record as governor deemed
acceptable, but one little quote from Nader is not?
|
To me, the answer is how our leaders are beholden to the Democratic
Party, by and large.
Jack Nichols: But isn't that just
throwing away your vote?
Michael Petrelis: Not at all. My
vote always count and is never tossed into the trash. Actually, my vote
for Nader counts many times over. First, it counts for Nader. Second, it
counts as vote against Gore. Third, it counts against Bush. Sound to me
like my vote is three times, at least.
So much of Nader's activism over the decades has helped bring about
equality in housing, banking, social services, environmental law and
consumer protections, that I proudly will cast my vote for Nader as a gay
AIDS activist.
Jack Nichols: Any last thoughts
to provoke our readers?
Michael Petrelis: Yes. Visit my
new web site, www.AIDS-Statistics.com and learn what current epidemiology
shows about AIDS in America. I have gathered the latest AIDS statistics
from all 50 states and the District of Columbia, all on one easy to
navigate web site. You might be surprised to learn what is happening in
AIDS diagnoses.
Finally, fight to let Nader into the presidential debates. If there
is one thing I have learned in my years as an activist, it is that when
the powers that be want to keep you out of a debate or meeting it is
because they fear you and your ideas are too challenging to the status
quo. I see the same thing happening with the so-called independent
commission running the debates.
Just like we need more sunshine shedding light on the AIDS industry
and its many problems, we also need Nader and the Green Party to bring
more openness to our government and political system.
|
