Something that is bothering me re. the whole HIV and circ argument - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-12-2009, 09:09 AM - Thread Starter
 
Claire and Boys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I've been involved in discussions with pro circs a few times and naturally the AIDS and HIV thing always comes up. The discussion always for them seems to boil down to one thing. They are aware that circ is not a complete prevention for HIV, but they are viewing it as an extra layer of protection say if a condom fails, or they say something like everyone has unprotected sex some time and if they have their child circumcised they have extra protection in that case.

What would you say to refute this argument?
Claire and Boys is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-12-2009, 09:36 AM
Fi.
 
Fi.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Nashville TN/Vancouver BC
Posts: 1,278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Remind them that those same cells in the foreskin are also lining the urethra including the opening so if there is any kind of fluid contact with the glans at all, the area is covered in the same cells that the foreskin is.

Long distance Mom to boarding school superstars E (9) and Layne (6).
Fi. is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 11:08 AM
 
needhelpplease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 90
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yeah, I've heard that argument a few times. It's a tough one. I usually try to frame it as "shouldn't the boy have the choice if he wants the extra protection or not?" and say a teenager should be given the information and the ability to choose if they want to have their skin cut off, and wear a condom, or just wear a condom. But then they say "nobody would choose it but getting it done as a baby is easier", so it's never-ending really.

Other possibilities are mentioning how it might give people a false sense of complacency if they misunderstand the protection, or that it's possible cut men are less likely to wear condoms due to less sensation (unfortunately I don't think there are any studies on this). I've also heard people say that when it comes down to practical difference, a 1 in 1000 chance of an infection and a 2 in 1000 chance of infection are basically the same.
needhelpplease is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 11:22 AM
 
LavenderMae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: where I write my own posts!
Posts: 12,213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd point out that circumcision hasn't seemed to keep the rate of HIV/AIDS down here in the US where the majority of adult men have been circumcised (I'd also point out that the HIV/AIDS rate is lower in many intact countries). Circumcision is not proven to cut down the rate of HIV infections in the US and the studies supporting it in other places are so flawed that it's hard to understand why people are using said study (studies) to justify circumcising their sons. If circumcision wasn't the norm here no one would be giving you that excuse. Is circumcision on the rise in intact countries because of the studies? It's just another excuse for circumcision and like all the rest it will be proven wrong or insignificant at the expense of a whole lot of people unfortunately.
I really hope my children use protection/condoms every single time they have sex (when they are not in a commited relationship and wanting to have a child/ren) and that is what I will be teaching them to do and they will know that not using protection will put them at risk. I would be giving them the same information above if they were circumcised (just like I'm giving my daughter).

OUR DAUGHTERS ARE PROTECTED SHOULDN'T OUR SONS BE TOO! :
LavenderMae is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 12:35 PM
 
Microsoap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,350
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
: The fact that the U.S. has the 2nd highest HIV/AIDS infection rate after Africa and the 2nd highest circ rate after Israel (I guess Israel and other Middle Eastern countries). Also the almost non-existent circ rate in Scandinavian countries (besides Europe and Russia) and their always historic low infection rates.
Microsoap is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 12:46 PM
 
In Exile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: spooky northeast
Posts: 674
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Just ask back why on earth despite the "extra protection" HIV was able to rise to these high infection rates-virtuallly every guy was circed in the time HIV came around (in the US)- it's pretty obvious that "the extra protection didn't work. Only a condom does, period.

If circumcision was to offer any kind of "protection"-why the heck then did Aids wipe out so many cut men??
In Exile is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 12:50 PM
 
Tinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: next door to majikfaerie
Posts: 9,715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by In Exile View Post
Just ask back why on earth despite the "extra protection" HIV was able to rise to these high infection rates-virtuallly every guy was circed in the time HIV came around (in the US)- it's pretty obvious that "the extra protection didn't work. Only a condom does, period.

If circumcision was to offer any kind of "protection"-why the heck then did Aids wipe out so many cut men??
: Couldn't have said it better myself.

senior majikfaerie cult member
Tinker is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 01:06 PM
 
In Exile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: spooky northeast
Posts: 674
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You know what REALLY always bothered me about the AIDS Argument??

When it was the gay community at first *circed men primarily*, a lot of people frolicked about how they gays are now being "punished" for their "behaviour", "only gays" getting sick, blablabla. (until their daughters started to get sick too)

And now they try to tell us that circ is protection you??? Pleeeeeeeeease, do they think we don't have a brain? According to legend HIV started out among circed men- and now that is "protection"???

I cannot fathom that we are thought to be THAT stupid to believe that- unless something in the initial HIV story is fishy.
In Exile is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 01:39 PM
 
QuietTempest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Knoxville, TN.
Posts: 159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Wasn't there another study done on this involving recently amputated foreskins (rather than long dead foreskins) that showed that live Langerhan cells fought off HIV cells?
QuietTempest is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 03:28 PM
 
Fellow Traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Formerly JWhispers
Posts: 1,842
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuietTempest View Post
Wasn't there another study done on this involving recently amputated foreskins (rather than long dead foreskins) that showed that live Langerhan cells fought off HIV cells?
Yes, De Witte in the Netherlands. He found that the Langerhans cells only became infected when they encountered very high viral loads.

Link: http://www.circumcisionandhiv.com/fi...Witte_2007.pdf
Fellow Traveler is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 04:15 PM
 
glongley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 1,031
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The bottom line is, babies are not sexually active. It is not a decision that needs to be made for a baby.

When a male is old enough to weigh whether he considers circumcision as a preventive for HIV to be a rational or desirable choice, compared to his own estimation of the value of having an intact sex organ, he can make a fully informed decision for himself. Circumcision should only be done when absolutely medically necessary or when an adult gives fully informed consent. Anything else is not ethically justifiable.

And if he wouldn't choose to have it done to himself as an adult, that's all the more reason to respect his right to make his own decisions about his body and which parts of it he would prefer to keep.

Gillian
glongley is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 04:51 PM
 
Haselnuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by needhelpplease View Post
Yeah, I've heard that argument a few times. It's a tough one. I usually try to frame it as "shouldn't the boy have the choice if he wants the extra protection or not?" and say a teenager should be given the information and the ability to choose if they want to have their skin cut off, and wear a condom, or just wear a condom.
:
Quote:
Originally Posted by needhelpplease View Post
But then they say "nobody would choose it but getting it done as a baby is easier", so it's never-ending really.
That's when you look at them like they're crazy and ask them if they can repeat that...
I mean, seriously, thats the sickest logic ever.
Haselnuss is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 07:42 PM - Thread Starter
 
Claire and Boys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,289
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haselnuss View Post
:

That's when you look at them like they're crazy and ask them if they can repeat that...
I mean, seriously, thats the sickest logic ever.
Oh, I agree! and THEN they say.. "Well, it's my right as a parent to make that choice for them since I am responsible for them" blah blah blah. Then if you question that the next is they bring up vaxes and how we make other decisions for them.

If they're really sick then they bring up things like haircuts, dressing our children, and grounding them when they're naughty. because of course circ is just the same. *sigh*
Claire and Boys is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 08:10 PM
 
latinalonestar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by glongley View Post
The bottom line is, babies are not sexually active. It is not a decision that needs to be made for a baby.

When a male is old enough to weigh whether he considers circumcision as a preventive for HIV to be a rational or desirable choice, compared to his own estimation of the value of having an intact sex organ, he can make a fully informed decision for himself. Circumcision should only be done when absolutely medically necessary or when an adult gives fully informed consent. Anything else is not ethically justifiable.

And if he wouldn't choose to have it done to himself as an adult, that's all the more reason to respect his right to make his own decisions about his body and which parts of it he would prefer to keep.

Gillian
:
latinalonestar is offline  
Old 01-12-2009, 08:33 PM
 
Fyrestorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 3,766
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There is a bumper sticker out there that says:

"If circumcision prevents AIDS, why are so many of my friends dead?"

I can tell you that the 3 friends I had that died of complications of HIV/AIDS were all cut. It ha nothing to do with their foreskins, 1 got it from infected blood and 2 got it from sex (they both swore they used condoms all the time) so being cut didn't help them, now did it?

I realize this is anecdotal...but it is what it is!

Victim of Birth Rape & Coerced ribboncesarean.gifUnnecesareanribboncesarean.gif What makes people think they can cut up someone else's genitals? nocirc.gif
Fyrestorm is offline  
Old 01-13-2009, 03:37 AM
 
robertandenith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I always respond:


"Well, those with circumcised penises, who wants to volunteer to have unprotected sex with an infected person and see if you are safe? You also need to report and let us know that in fact you are free of infection."

So sad I never see a reply after I make this comment It works like a charm.

Latina Mama of 3 and Wife of a great man since 1997
: : : : : : :
robertandenith is offline  
Old 01-13-2009, 03:39 AM
 
robertandenith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire and Boys View Post
Oh, I agree! and THEN they say.. "Well, it's my right as a parent to make that choice for them since I am responsible for them" blah blah blah. Then if you question that the next is they bring up vaxes and how we make other decisions for them.
they are just 'finding' excuses to forgive circumcision I see this all the time too...

Latina Mama of 3 and Wife of a great man since 1997
: : : : : : :
robertandenith is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 03:53 PM
 
Haselnuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire and Boys View Post
Oh, I agree! and THEN they say.. "Well, it's my right as a parent to make that choice for them since I am responsible for them" blah blah blah. Then if you question that the next is they bring up vaxes and how we make other decisions for them.

If they're really sick then they bring up things like haircuts, dressing our children, and grounding them when they're naughty. because of course circ is just the same. *sigh*
Yep. Of course, most of the vaccines are against diseases they're at risk for as children.
Haselnuss is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 04:05 PM
 
taramoon13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 441
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ummmm, what about just teaching your kids not to engage in high risk behaviors (unprotected sex, drug use)?!??! i think that would be a pretty good protection against HIV alone. that's the thing no one ever addresses, what are the percentages of people that get HIV in this country that are not engaging in these behaviors? i don't have an exact figure, but i can't imagine it's very high.
taramoon13 is offline  
Old 01-14-2009, 04:34 PM
 
Haselnuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yep.
I think I read somewhere that circumcised men are more likely to refuse to wear condoms... which makes sense, doesn't it?
Haselnuss is offline  
Old 01-15-2009, 02:40 PM
 
QuietTempest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Knoxville, TN.
Posts: 159
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwhispers View Post
Yes, De Witte in the Netherlands. He found that the Langerhans cells only became infected when they encountered very high viral loads.

Link: http://www.circumcisionandhiv.com/fi...Witte_2007.pdf
Yes, that's it. Thanks.
QuietTempest is offline  
Old 01-15-2009, 03:27 PM
 
columbusmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Running
Posts: 3,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by glongley View Post
The bottom line is, babies are not sexually active. It is not a decision that needs to be made for a baby.

When a male is old enough to weigh whether he considers circumcision as a preventive for HIV to be a rational or desirable choice, compared to his own estimation of the value of having an intact sex organ, he can make a fully informed decision for himself. Circumcision should only be done when absolutely medically necessary or when an adult gives fully informed consent. Anything else is not ethically justifiable.

And if he wouldn't choose to have it done to himself as an adult, that's all the more reason to respect his right to make his own decisions about his body and which parts of it he would prefer to keep.

Gillian


Oh and I am tired of hearing the std/hiv arguement!!

Wife to DH(15 years)and Mama to: Jacob(5/02)kid.gifribbonpurple.gif, and Alina(7/07)energy.gifI luxlove.gifbellyhair.gif
columbusmomma is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off