Search

The inclusion of Men who have Sex with Men (MSM) in global health policies has resulted in significant resource prioritisations in order to treat and prevent the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS). MSM policy inclusions and health prioritisations, however, are primarily motivated by an epidemiological understanding of male same‐sex sexual behaviours, based on biological risks associated with HIV infection. Owing to South Africa's high HIV rates and MSM policy prioritisations, we aimed to examine experiences of engagement in urban MSM‐targeted HIV interventions. Qualitative interviews were conducted with participants (n = 20) who previously engaged in MSM‐HIV interventions, across a variety of historically marginalised "township" spaces in Cape Town, South Africa. Interviews were audio‐recorded with the consent of all participants, transcribed verbatim, and verified, and anonymised using alpha‐numeric codes. Data were analysed for core themes and in this paper we describe interactions between biological and social risks that shape city life for MSM in diverse township spaces. When positioned against the background of the Neuropolis, a recent sociological intervention by Des Fitzgerald, Nikolas Rose and Ilina Singh, our results portray urban life among MSM as a form of biological citizenship: (1) constructed by experiences that are constitutive of biosocial stressors, based on (2) health‐seeking attitudes and behaviours, and (3) reinforced through socio‐spatial engagements in peer‐led and community‐based HIV interventions. We conclude by offering critical insight into recent calls for the development of comprehensive and localised peer‐led health programmes as a current void in the geographies of health and sexualities in the global south. In this paper we describe Men who have Sex with Men and their urban experiences associated with HIV/AIDS interventions, and socio‐economic and spatial health inequalities in "townships" across Cape Town, South Africa. MSM's engagement in HIV interventions was examined as a form of urban citizenship that is: (1) constructed by biological and social interactions, (2) based on health‐seeking attitudes and behaviours, and (3) reinforced through peer‐led socio‐spatial relations. We offer critical insights into recent calls for comprehensive urban interventions in Africa as a current void in the geographies of health and sexualities in the global south. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper develops infrastructural citizenship as an analytical framework that bridges geography's sub‐disciplinary silos. While urban geography promotes infrastructure as a core lens for understanding the city, recognising that political struggles are mediated through infrastructure, discourses of citizenship are rarely employed. Similarly, while political and development geography promote citizenship as vital in understanding socio‐political life, often framed by citizen‐led action to secure basic rights and services, critical debates on urban infrastructure are typically overlooked. Consequently, despite the growth in studies recognising the politicised nature of urban infrastructure and the centrality of citizenship to urban life, the multiple ways that citizenship and infrastructure relate in diverse urban settings has received limited critical attention. This paper demonstrates how urban dwellers' relationship to public infrastructure in the domestic spaces of the home and settlement, and the temporal scale of the everyday, offers a representation of broader political identities and perceptions, framed through the language of citizenship. In South Africa, despite 25 years of significant post‐apartheid public investment in housing and services, frustration at poor service delivery and beneficiary (mis)use of public infrastructure remains dominant. While citizens adapt and consume public infrastructure in ways deemed "illegal" and "uncivil" by the state, citizens view these actions as a legitimate form of "citizenship‐in‐action" in the context of rapid urbanisation and poverty, and are frustrated by perceptions of state neglect. Using the analytical framework of infrastructural citizenship, the paper reveals how this state–society disjuncture represents a citizenship mismatch that is embodied in infrastructure, rather than a material product of state disinterest or citizen destruction per se. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]