Discrimination against people living with or otherwise affected by HIV/AIDS has been dubbed "the third epidemic" of HIV/AIDS, the first being the spread of the virus itself, followed by the clinical disease, acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Every society in the world has provided evidence of HIV/AIDS-related discrimination and most importantly stigmatisation. As with most forms of stigmatisation, its manifestations range from the subtle to the fully institutionalised. Some countries have adopted legal protections for people living with HIV/AIDS; however, there is no evidence whether these measures have resulted in reductions in the incidence of HIV/AIDS-related discrimination or violence.
             It is important to firstly understand what the definition of stigma is "a mark or token of infamy, disgrace, or reproach." (The Oxford Reference Dictionary, p. 764). Erving Goffman (1963) extended the knowledge of stigma in society and distinguished the difference between the discredited and discreditable. He labelled discredited, if we know the stigma before we really know the person. An example of this was a fixed mark on a person, like a scar in one's face that is hard to conceal. And the discreditable, if we do not know their stigma unless it is revealed to us by the person herself or by others. An example of this being homosexuals or drug users who are generally able to conceal their deviant identities to the general public (if they wish so).
             These above meanings leaves little doubt that a stigma like AIDS is a double-edged sword, a brand of its own and in many cases discreditable. This simple description expresses society's inability to deal with HIV and AIDS and most specifically the transmission of the disease throughout society via the innocent and the damned.
             To clarify further the distinction between HIV and AIDS victims, it is important to understand the medical difference between them. HIV indicates tha...