Betty Dodson with Carlin Ross
Better Orgasms. Better World.
 |
Betty's Vaginal Barbell |
 |
My Romantic Love Wars: A Sexual Memoir - EBOOK EDITION |
 |
Betty Dodson's Bodysex Workshop DVD |
 |
Betty Dodson Liberating women one orgasm at a time |
 |
Carlin Ross Sex, Politics & More Sex |
 |
Eric Amaranth Sex life coaching, real life erotica, and wellness |
 |
Lawrence Lanoff Reality Hacker. Sex Educator. Geek. |
 |
Liandra Dahl Sex Documentarian |
 |
LilithLand Women, Sex, Culture & Relationships |
 |
cajun sausage Lovin' Dr. Betty since 1996! |
 |
Christina Cicchelli Professional Pervert |
 |
Danny Wylde Male. Libra. Whore |
 |
Dr. Lulu History & the Material Culture of Sex |
 |
Emily and Ju Queer love |
 |
Eric Francis Astrology & Adventure |
 |
Jenn Parenthood. With Cursing |
 |
Jessica Kramer Liberating Birth |
 |
jexhibitionism |
 |
Kasini Poet. Educator. Catalyst. Mother. |
 |
LesleyS Redefining my sexual self after babies. |
 |
Logan Levkoff sexologist, sex educator, intellisexual, author, mom |
 |
Marisa Black Finding room for all of me |
 |
Marylou Naccarato Learn how to raise your level of “Sexability” |
 |
Palesa Art + Sex + Media + Empowerment |
 |
Princess What would my mother say? |
 |
Solo Sexualist |
 |
VirginMonoblogger Thought all virgins were the same? Think again. |
 |
WildOrchid A selfsexual, toy loving, possibly bisexual total virgin |
I wrote an article about the benefits of sexual hygiene - doing my research I realized that if a man is circumcised and takes a shower or washes his dick with hydrogen peroxide after sex his chances of contracting anything are quite slim. Here's the link: http://www.sexherald.com/healthy-sex/good_sexual_hygiene-_your_health_depends_on_it.html
Unfortunately, not so for the ladies. But it looks like they may look to circumcision as a means to combat HIV/AIDS in South Africa.
Southern Africa, the epicentre of the AIDS epidemic, agreed to look at male circumcision to fight the pandemic in the wake of reports that it could halve the risk of males contractinThe pandemic in the wake of reports that it could halve the risk of males contracting HIV.
A 14-nation regional bloc ended a three-day meeting on HIV/AIDS by stating that "member states will hold further national consultations to examine the results and will work with the World Health Organisation and UNAIDS to determine the implications of these studies."
The Southern African Development Community (SADC) said it had noted evidence from Uganda and Kenya and another study conducted in a South African township "confirming that male circumcision has a 50-60 percent preventative effect."
"There is general interest in most countries to consider this and we will come up with a clear action plan on how to act on male circumcision," Keketso Sefeane, chief of Lesotho's national AIDS commission, told AFP.
"We want male circumcision to be done safely... We want to use it as a vehicle to communicate HIV and AIDS issues," said Sefeane.
A report by UNAIDS published this year shows that 63 percent of all adults and children with HIV live in sub-Saharan Africa.
According to the report, adults and children newly infected with the virus rose to 2.8 million in 2006 from 2.4 million in 2004.
The SADC said it would develop an HIV prevention strategy which will be released early next year "to ensure a sustained focus on HIV prevention."
Zambian surgeon and university lecturer Kasendo Bowa had earlier urged the region to embrace male circumcision, saying there was "substantially overwhelming" evidence that it reduced the transmission of HIV.
"SADC must make a decision and generate leadership on this issue. The HIV pandemic has gone up in the region and the key difference is male circumcision," he said.
"It is a low-cost intervention which costs only 15 dollars (11 euros), unlike AIDS drugs which cost 480 dollars (364 euros) per year per person and it's a continued expense."
He said circumcision "is not an isolated intervention, but part of a package of HIV prevention."
The meeting here in the Malawi commercial capital Blantyre has also been addressing how sex workers and gays can be roped in to help the fight against the disease.
Sex workers and gays were regarded as "important stakeholders" in the fight, said Lesotho's AIDS commission chief Sefeane.
"Unfortunately, there is no data on homosexuals and commercial sex workers in the region although there is high levels of HIV prevalence in Mauritius among these groups which has increased to 100 percent from 2003," he said.
Kitgum Women Call For Compulsory Male Circumcision
Throwing out the baby with the bath water
I've had the male-circumcision debate to the point of ad nauseum over the years, and one consistency I've found is that every single pro argument is filled with the same unscientific myths (ie. it's "cleaner") and subjective assertions (ie. "most women prefer it"). Yet, despite how much evidence, scientific fact and very simple logic that's given to refute their repetitive and elementary arguments, their position never changes. Ever. You can give them an indisputable fact, and they will ignore or reject it flatly. And you know what that means? Fanatic. Zealot. Delusion. They're no different than those Christian fundamentalists who will believe, until the day they die, that having sex before marriage or being gay will send you to hell. Nor are they better than the Muslim fundamentalists who will believe, until the day they die, that women are property.
Now as far as circumcision reducing the chance of contracting AIDS goes, well despite that this may be true, I still cannot possibly advocate such a practice as mandatory infant genital mutilation. It's simply throwing out the baby with the bath water; like amputating a leg over a gangrenous pinky toe. Before cutting off parts of penises, why not try doing something about the absolutely mind boggling rape epidemic that plagues the country, wherein 1 in 3 men admit to having committed rape? (BBC) Why not improve sex education? Did we forget about condoms? The issue is with their culture of rape and sexual ignorance. The solution to the AIDS problem will not be found in cutting off body parts. It will only come about as a result of vast societal improvements.
And as a final point, there has actually been a relatively recent study out of Tanzania suggesting a correlation between female circumcision and reduced incidences of AIDS infection (Stallings et al.). If this is true, would it matter one bit? Absolutely not! I don't even care if it's "just" the clitoral hood or labia minora being removed and not the clitoris. It's still abhorrent and shouldn't even be considered as an option for AIDS prevention.
Dr. Amy Tuteur of Science Based Medicine Says "Circumcise"
Usual parade of malcontent males sniping at the good doctor for her humane recommendation of foreskin removal. Their comments are suggestive of mental disorders on their part. Some surgical foreskin restorations have taken place, and males were required to first submit to psychiatric exam. The skin of the banana wasn't intended to remain on the fruit, so to speak! Bernadine Healey MD, a cardiologist, of US News & World Report, also favors male circumcision at birth.
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=3310#comments
Blog Troll
So a cardiologist is recommending circumcision? That is like a urologist recommending that smoking is good for the heart because it puts it under stress and therefore it is exercised.
This will be my last response to this thread as it has become abundantly clear that Anonymous is a blog troll intent on causing trouble and misunderstanding...
A sad waste of everyone's time.
Sexual reasons
But don't you get it, she has sexual reasons to promote circumcision.
Interesting Religious Aspects of Male Circumcision
Female minister argues for male circumcision---"The foreskin is a powerful symbol of sin. It must be cut off."
Perhaps for sin we could say something medical instead, these being modern times. But the outcome will remain the same. The male will lose his foreskin at birth with no input into the decision and that's absolutely as it should be.
http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2008/03/10/circumcision-the-woman-and-the-k...
It's nice how this person
It's nice how this person refers to circumcision as a "penis tax". And says that "women are entitled to a circumcised penis". And remains anonymous.
I say this as a young woman who's never come into contact with a penis, intact or not, but i'm pretty sure that even if I had at this point, my feelings would be the same; it's NOT an entitlement. If that's your preference, fine, but to reject somebody based on something so superficial is beyond me.
Women are entitled to a circumcised penis
It is clean, prevents disease, and gives more pleasure.
Compulsory Circumcision of All Males by Law
Think of circumcision as a "penis tax" or treating foreskins like banned substances. They have better uses elsewhere (cosmetics) and there is no "moral right" for the "owner" to retain it. It belongs to society and society has decided against it. Execute the foreskin!
Mandatory Circumcision Only Overseas?
We keep reading about the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta considering a recommendation of mandatory male circumcision in the U.S. Inasmuch as the World Health Organization and the Gates Foundation favor foreskin removal, the CDC should give its green light to routine compulsory circumcision. The United Church of Christ underwrites medical clinics in the Philippines for circumcision of young males. Society is best served by removing all foreskins and the analog to Congressional legislation protecting females, is to mandate circumcision of males.
EDUCATION - not Foreskin Amputation
I realize that extreme measures often seem warranted when discussing a disease that kills SO many people, and ruins the lives of so many others.
However, HIV is not an airborne virus, it is spread as a result of very specific, avoidable, behaviors. A HUGE problem with using circumcision as a treatment problem, especially as a 'mandatory' measure is that it takes a useful, healthy, sensitive part away from a man's body without his consent. They once did tests on female genitalia to see if removing parts of them would reduce HIV rates, and I have heard the results were positive, though the studies were deemed unethical. I think it is pretty clear why they would be deemed unethical too, if we take a second to think about it.
The ideal treatment for HIV is not to remove treasured body parts of the healthy, in hopes that the slight reduction in transmission rates (hypothetically) would save lives. No, instead we should put ALL of our focus on increasing education, and providing STD/STI testing clinics, and available condoms to countries with high rates of HIV. The largest reason why HIV rates are so high is because of all the myths and misinformation. SOLVE THAT. If you give someone all the available tools they need to stay clean - and education can do that - then if they STILL contract HIV they are at least partly to blame.
Mandatory circumcision would make every man a victim. I do not even PARTLY agree with such a method being used, and it disgusts me that our culture feels that it is easier to cut off part of a mans penis then teach him how to avoid getting HIV.
It is also worth pointing out that there have been several studies in which the data has not been replicated at all. The very notion that circumcision reduces HIV rates is STILL in question. As well, remember that case studies, such as the ones performed in Africa, have many variables that cannot be accounted for. Correlation does not mean causation.
EDUCATION AND CONDOMS!!! I cannot stress that enough.
----------------------------------------------------
23 - M - Critical Relativist and Feminist (Equalist) - Canada
Male Foreskin Amputation IS Education
Since the penis is going to penetrate women, it's up to women, not men, to have it circumcised. Cervical problems are caused by absence of male circumcision. Circumcision of either sex involves tissue removal; but only in males is it easily justifiable. I say, "circumcise them all." I know a doctor who calls the foreskin a sewer, because it gives bacteria a place to hide. Going back a long time, women started expressing preference for female Ob-Gyns, so the trend has been for more females to circumcise male neonates. It's a very old trend, dating to Exodus 4:25. The Gomco clamp circumcision method remains the most popular method for circumcising the male's penis. U.N. agencies back male circumcision, so what's the problem? Burn victims need foreskins harvested from circumcised males, and Barbara Walters has advocated their use in facial cosmetics for skin restoration.
Anonymous and assinine
Proper education, hygiene and safer sex practices is what is needed not more mutilation. Men and women need to be mutually responsible for their own sexual health.
Your proposed mass circumcision is as assinine and anyone proposing and practicing genital mutilation for young women. If it is not right for one sext then it is not right for either.
I saw a show on one of the learning channels years ago (Yeah, I did that a lot. I'm a geek.) that brought this up. Apparently in areas of africa where circumcision is common practice, aids is less prevalent.
It seems that there's certain cells in the foreskin that are designed to trap, absorb, and kill harmful bacteria and viruses. However, aids being as resilient as it is, these only serve to bring the virus into the body faster, increasing the chance of contracting HIV.
I'd forgotten all about it until I read this post.
No Anti-Male Agenda But Yes An Anti-Foreskin Agenda
Circumcision is for the male's own best interests as well as those of women. Female circumcision is mutilation, male circumcision is preventative and cosmetic in 2 ways--it looks better and the excised tissue is used in advanced skin treatments for ladies. Don't dwell on where it came from and certainly not on the fact of the "owner" having given no consent. His parent(s) signed off on it and that closes the case. I imagine it bothers these dissenting males that so many female MD's are out there with scissors and scalpel in hand circumcising baby boys. And it's to be wondered that, for those males whose parent(s) requested pain relief, did the doctor in fact provide it? Or did she assure them so it wouldn't be an issue, then went and skinned him while he did some serious howling? We know that pain relief was not commonly used until maybe the mid-1980's or later. It does appear the pain was temporary and they are not "howling" now, but are better sanitized. Injections are themselves very painful and have their own risks. Circumcision of males has been around for thousands of years and will continue to be with us as far into the future as anyone can see (and remember in an interview late in life John Wayne referred to God as "he OR SHE!")
Sort of a Letdown
In reading the various posts on this site over a year and a half I'd come to believe it was one of the very rare websites where the subject is important and all the posters were articulate and capable of linear thought. Then I came across this circumcision thread and learned, again, that wackos turn up everywhere. Even on Dodson & Ross.
These strange posts of Anonymous wander all over the place. They have the irrational quality of religious beliefs. All the positive assertions, the jumbled statements of "facts" (known mostly to Anonymous) make point-by-point rebuttal an impossible task. It looks like useful debate is dead in this thread.
Perhaps using the term wacko is a label too ad hominem; Seriousblack probably had it right with blog troll.