[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-191790-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":81,"doc-detail-191790-en":127},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","p4r-01-intro-language-considerations","P4R-01-Intro-Language Considerations","","Guidance for using precise, non-stigmatizing language when discussing HIV risk, exposure, acquisition, and transmission. The material explains why avoid gender-binary terms like “both” or “either,” replacing them with inclusive wording that specifies gender identities. It recommends substituting “risk” with “likelihood” or “chance” and using clearer epidemiology-aligned phrasing for higher-exposure populations. It also advises on accurate terminology such as “serodifferent,” “transmit” instead of “infect,” and language that distinguishes acquisition from onward transmission.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/","Template",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/general/","General",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/p4r-01-intro-language-considerations/191790/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/p4r-01-intro-language-considerations/191790.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":42,"@type":43},"\tWilliam","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-09-29","2026-09-03",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"Why avoid terms like “both genders” or “either gender” in HIV-related writing?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"They assume a gender binary and can exclude nonbinary people and other gender minorities, including transgender individuals. Inclusive language using individuals of all genders or specifying gender identities is recommended.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What is the recommended alternative to using “risk” or “high risk” in many contexts?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Use more precise terms such as “likelihood” or “chance.” For populations or behaviors, consider wording that describes higher likelihood of exposure and better reflects disease epidemiology.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Why distinguish “acquisition” from “transmission” when describing HIV prevention?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Acquisition and transmission are two separate actions, so word choice must be accurate. For example, a method may prevent acquisition for users without preventing onward transmission.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},191790,1788410782,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,89,94,99,104,109,114,119,124],{"id":85,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":86,"show_sort_weight":87,"slug":88},11,"Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":90,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":91,"show_sort_weight":92,"slug":93},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":95,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":96,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":98},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":100,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":101,"show_sort_weight":102,"slug":103},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":105,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":106,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":110,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":115,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":120,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":122,"slug":123},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":125,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":126},158,"general-158",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":128},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":129,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":130,"doc_module":22,"category_id":125,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":131,"file_id":132,"file_url":133,"file_type":134,"file_size":135,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":122,"language":136,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":137,"faqs":138,"seo_title":139,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":80,"read_time":26},5909887254083,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","| INSTEAD OF  | CONSIDER USING  | BECAUSE  |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Both genders/ either gender* | Individuals of all genders OR\u003Cbr>specify (cisgender men, cisgender women, trans men, trans women, etc.) | Using “both” or “either” assumes a gender binary and excludes many other people —nonbinary individuals, other gender minorities—and is often used in ways intended to exclude transgender people. |\n| Risk\u003Cbr>(when referring to the possibility of something happening) | Likelihood, chance | Unless you are speaking about relative risk in the context of a piece of scientific literature, using “likelihood” or “chance” is likely more precise and does not carry with it the stigma that “risk” carries. |\n| Serodiscordant | Serodifferent | “Discordant” implies a couple is at odds, clashing, or unsuitable for one another.“Serodifferent” focuses on what is different —the HIV serostatus. This change reinforces that while the HIV status of people can be different, it does not put them in discord. It is okay for people to have different HIV serostatuses. |\n| High risk, risky or at-risk (when referring to a person or population) | Individual/population with a higher likelihood of exposure to HIV, high-incidence population | The terms “high risk,”“risky,” and “at-risk”\u003Cbr>are not descriptive of what is meant and may contribute to external and internal stigmatization of individuals or groups. The terms to consider using more precisely address societal or cultural dynamics and better reflect disease epidemiology. |\n\n| INSTEAD OF  | CONSIDER USING  | BECAUSE  |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| High risk or risky | When appropriate, use terms | Labeling behaviors as “high risk” or “risky”may |  |\n| (when referring to a behavior) | that describe behaviors – condomless sex, sharing injection equipment, etc.—or behavior that may expose someone to HIV. | contribute to stigmatization of those behaviors or populations who engage in them while failing to recognize that it is potential exposure during a behavior that should be addressed. |  |\n| The ring prevents HIV among women. | The ring prevents HIV acquisition for users during receptive vaginal intercourse. | The suggested language is specific and inclusive. It does not assume gender or exclude nonbinary people or others with diverse genders. |  |\n| Infect | Transmit | The language of contagion may perpetuate |  |\n|  |  | | stereotypes about people living with HIV and should be avoided. It can carry the stigma of a threat or of being unclean or contagious, all of which can be damaging to people living with HIV and their experiences accessing or seeking treatment.\u003Cbr>Keep in mind that acquisition and transmission are two separate actions, so be accurate in word choice. For example: voluntary medical male circumcision helps prevent acquisition but does not help prevent onward transmission. |\n| Infections | HIV transmissions, new HIV diagnoses,\u003Cbr>new incidences of HIV |  |  |\n| Prevents HIV infection | Prevents HIV,\u003Cbr>prevents transmission of HIV,\u003Cbr>prevents HIV acquisition |  |  |","cbCaimn3As6WSjk0","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaimn3As6WSjk0","pdf",1252384,"English","# Language Considerations\n## Inclusive gender terminology\n## Replacing stigma-laden risk terms\n## Accurate HIV status and transmission wording","[{\"question\":\"Why avoid terms like “both genders” or “either gender” in HIV-related writing?\",\"answer\":\"They assume a gender binary and can exclude nonbinary people and other gender minorities, including transgender individuals. Inclusive language using individuals of all genders or specifying gender identities is recommended.\"},{\"question\":\"What is the recommended alternative to using “risk” or “high risk” in many contexts?\",\"answer\":\"Use more precise terms such as “likelihood” or “chance.” For populations or behaviors, consider wording that describes higher likelihood of exposure and better reflects disease epidemiology.\"},{\"question\":\"Why distinguish “acquisition” from “transmission” when describing HIV prevention?\",\"answer\":\"Acquisition and transmission are two separate actions, so word choice must be accurate. For example, a method may prevent acquisition for users without preventing onward transmission.\"}]","P4R-01-Intro-Language Considerations | PDF"]