AIDS day and bacon

Did anyone else see Hillary Clinton's remarks for World AIDS Day yesterday? Sometimes I forget how much I love her. However, I read this for my lady times class, and it got me thinking.
In a reading, "Death by Culture", we did earlier in the semester, the author (Uma Narayan) discusses how in the US and Western European countries in the position to offer monetary aid to other (or "Other") countries, issues such as rape, lack of access to health care and education for children, the sex industry and associated spread of STDs in these other countries are seen as being caused by cruel, oppressive, patriarchal cultures, and are taken out of the context of the same or similar issues that exist within all patriarchal societies, including our own.
Focusing on fixing these problems in Other, third-world countries perpetuates the mythology of an enlightened and (by comparison, I suppose) non-patriarchal Western society that can only exist in contrast to a barbaric, patriarchal foil. Grewal posits, and I agree, that this hinders our ability to accurately and effectively discuss and address these problems not only abroad but within our own society.
Is it possible that more public discussion of issues mentioned above (caused, arguably, by institutionalized racism, sexism, classism, etc.) in the context of our own country could lead to more understanding and therefore more effective foreign aid programs?
In her remarks for World AIDS Day, Clinton focused stated, "Obviously, our efforts are hampered whenever discrimination or marginalization of certain populations results in less effective outreach and treatment." She focused on the need to "stand against any efforts to marginalize and criminalize and penalize members of the LGBT community worldwide. It is an unacceptable step backwards on behalf of human rights. But it is also a step that undermines the effectiveness of efforts to [AIDS] worldwide." Although it's obviously important to talk about strategies to treat and combat the spread of AIDS "worldwide", I wonder at the need to repeat that phrase. To me, this passage ended up sounding a little hypocritical in light of the fact that repealing the ban on people living with HIV immigrating or traveling to the US has taken so long. In the reading, Grewal talks about the issue of gender-based asylum, and I wonder what effect this ban has had on women who may want to seek refugee status in the US. I also wonder whether she was referencing sex-workers (in the US or abroad) at all within the group of "stigmatized" people, and why the issue of the the "prostitution pledge" instituted by PEPFAR wasn't referenced explicitly. It would seem that, as Grewal posited, sex-based violence perpetuated by people in one's own society is still a taboo subject and explicit discussion (and therefore effective aid and policy reform regarding)this cannot be, as Grewal puts it, "warmly received."

On a much, much lighter note, I was inspired by Emily's stuffing on Thanksgiving and will be making a roasted chicken (2.50 at West Side Market) with bacon, pecan and apple cider stuffing tomorrow.

Loves!