Risky Sexual Behaviors Among African-Americans

This data driven volume is an excellent illustration of the necessity of incorporating a contextual analysis when attempting to examine risky sexual behaviors within ethnic minority communities. Why is a contextual analysis so critical here? It is increasingly apparent that the rationale for why one cohort of African-American males engages in some behavior may be qualitatively different from other cohorts of African-American men. Similarly, AfricanAmerican males and females will also be qualitatively different from each other in the rationales why they choose to engage in safer sex practices. One size simply does not fit all and a contextual analysis allows for these different developmental trajectories to appear on the scene and take their rightful place in this important discussion. What are the particular strengths associated with this volume? Johnson should be commended for systematically exploring this controversial topic in this volume utilizing the scientific method as the beacon for unraveling this rather complex puzzle. Previous generations of researchers have focused routinely on the comparison of ethnic minority populations with Euro-American middle class heterosexual populations. Differences generated from these analyses were interpreted based on the ‘‘deficit’’ model. Thus, differences from the Euro-American ‘‘standard’’ were equated, for the most part, as an indication of pathology. Johnson rejects that approach and relies instead on focusing on African-American populations within their own sociopolitical contexts and letting the data guide his empirical efforts. Three realities seem to rise to the surface in this volume based on this approach. First, gender differences are rather striking and it appears that we have more of a handle on what occurs with African-American males with respect to the manifestation of risky sexual behaviors than we have for African-American females. Thus, gender is a critical variable to consider when exploring this question. Second, there needs to be an appreciation for both quantitative as well as qualitative research methodologies, if there is any hope in unraveling this puzzle. Focus groups can be invaluable in providing the scientific community with insights as to the motivations of African-Americans in their decision-making whether to engage in safe sex practices. Quantitative research methodologies, in isolation, raise far more questions than they resolve. Third, the most important breakthrough that these findings reveal is the reality that HIV/AIDS researchers have limited themselves to a public health perspective when exploring these questions, which is problematic. This narrow focus has eliminated a whole range of social-clinical constructs that are systemic in nature from being placed on the table and incorporated into research paradigms. The research of Wyatt, focusing on the negotiation strategies of African-American females with respect to engaging in safer sex practices within the contexts of close relationships, is one of the few exceptions to this rule. Johnson, in this volume, has made some concerted steps in calling upon researchers to incorporate more social-clinical constructs, which are systemic in nature when examining African-American men and their negotiation strategies within the contexts of close relationships. It is clear that such work will be controversial in nature but the payoff C. W. Parks Jr. (&) Programs in School Psychology and Educational Psychology, Graduate School of Education at Alliant International University, Los Angeles, 1000 S. Fremont Ave., Unit 5, Alhambra, CA 91803, USA e-mail: cparks@alliant.edu