"White's diagnosis demonstrated to many that AIDS was not exclusive to homosexuals." Did it really demonstrate that the disease was not exclusive to a particular community, or did it demonstrate that it was not exclusively contracted through sexual contact? Did it really demonstrate to "many" or did a significant number of people remain prejudiced?"  Yes, the gay community felt very strongly that White's illness *did* demonstrate AIDS was not exclusive to a particular group of people.  Amongst those who remained prejudiced, they remained prejudiced by-and-large because they *wanted* it to be a gay-disease in order to either give them a better reason to be prejudiced against homosexuals or to promote their own cause and/or agenda.  But it wasn't as if White having AIDS suddenly changed the face of AIDS - it took time, but his illness *did* make a difference in how AIDS was thought of and perceived .  I remember once hearing an educated, well-known and repspected pastor and Bible scholar saying, "AIDS is lodged in the rectum, that's why it's a homosexual, sodomite disease".  And that was *after* Ryan White died.  As far as the above claiming that there was "resentment" amongst PWAs that it took White's illness to bring the proper attention to AIDS amongst the mainstream media and the rest of America - that's untrue.  There was general anger that there had been people dying of the disease for so long and no one outside the gay community seemed to care.  There was definite anger toward the Reagan administration, the Moral Majority and what was seen as the self-righteous extreme right.  But actual "resentment" from PWA's in the gay community toward a child dying of the disease many they knew were dying of?  Not.