HIV and circumcision

philsmith

Just Browsing
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Posts
4
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
146
Gender
Male
I don't post much, but reading the NY Times this morning made me think of the fellas on LPSG.

Have you ever heard this?

Circumcision has been proven to reduce a man’s risk of contracting H.I.V. by more than half. Yet two years after the World Health Organization recommended the surgery, the government here still does not provide it to help fight the disease or educate the public about its benefits.
And later on...
But some said they were also drawn by a surprising, if powerful, motivation: They had heard from recently circumcised friends that it makes for better sex. You last longer, they said. Your lovers think you’re cleaner and more exciting in bed.
“My girlfriend was nagging me about this,” said Shane Koapeng, 24. “So I was like, ‘O.K., let me do it.’ ”
The whole article is here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/world/africa/20circumcision.html?ref=health
 

Christiaan

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Posts
191
Media
0
Likes
39
Points
163
Location
Donegal, Ireland
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
If circumcision is so effective in fighting AIDS, why is the HIV rate so high in the US where circumcision is common and so low in the EU where it is rare. I much rathwe think it's because we teach sex ed in schools and stress safe sex instead of the lunatic religious right fighting sex ed like they do in the US.

There are also reports coming from Africa that the studies used in the furtherence of this idea is rubbish. It is having the effect of making circumcised men think they can't get AIDS.

What utter bull shit. Let's yank out teeth and cure tooth decay, remove female breast buds and cure breast cancer, etc.

Or best yet, find a cure for the disease instead of cutting off body parts as an excuse for a cure that doesn't work and actually promotes the idea unprotected sex is OK because you're cut.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buddie

B_HeartsAfire

Experimental Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Posts
59
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
93
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Condoms work better than cutting off part of your penis in the hope that you somehow will not get HIV or the hope that your chances will be lowered to the point where it is not an issue to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buddie

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
People seem to be forgetting that the study suggests circumcision as a measure to reduce, not ELIMINATE the risk of getting HIV. Whether or not you want to believe that is your choice.

Christiaan: Let's get real... I don't think there's a doctor or a reasonable soul out there who is suggesting that all you need to do is get a circumcision and you can unprotected sex without fear of getting a disease. If not out there in our vast world, at least on this very board. So let's get rid of that argument right now. However, if there's medical evidence to support that circumcision does help reduce the risk, then why should you or anyone else be opposed to someone doing it?

herkimer snow: God forbid someone actually prefers a dick that doesn't look like yours. That doesn't make them anymore vacuous than yourself. And unless you have the videos to show off your particular techniques along with an extensive resumé of satisfied customers, don't even try to comment on the sexual performance of others based on the lack of foreskin. Talk about self absorbed! :rolleyes:
 

herkimer snow

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2006
Posts
141
Media
0
Likes
14
Points
163
Gender
Male
VinylBoy missed the point entirely. When a girl asks, demands, or even suggests that sex would be a lot better if her man would get circumcised, it's not about preference. It's about control. If he goes ahead with the surgery he has no guarantee that sex will be better for either of them or that she will even care about him any more. Maybe he'll like his new cock, maybe he won't. One thing is certain, he'd better not suggest to her that sex with her would be better if she pumped up her chest with implants. If it would be her idea, okay. But not if it's his. That's my take on the "preference" thing.
My observation over a long life is that most women need to control men. Most American women (part of the circumcising tribe) have no experience with foreskins and think the normal thing is have them cut off. A foreskin, which is the natural part of a male, gets the "Ewwww" reaction. "I wouldn't have sex with anyone who is not cut!" I find that kind of thinking very offensive, not because of the circumcision (an adult male can do whatever he wants to his cock) but because of that kind of brainless reaction. That's vacuity, and when it comes to foreskins too many American women fit the description.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
VinylBoy missed the point entirely. When a girl asks, demands, or even suggests that sex would be a lot better if her man would get circumcised, it's not about preference. It's about control.

Bullshit. That is, unless, you assume that it isn't possible that a person can prefer a cut penis in the same fashion as someone else prefers an uncut one?

If he goes ahead with the surgery he has no guarantee that sex will be better for either of them or that she will even care about him any more.

Well, I agree that nobody should be getting a circumcision just so they can get laid. However, not every person who says what they prefer isn't doing it just our of power & manipulation.

My observation over a long life is that most women need to control men.

That's such a sad excuse. Some men want to control women just as equally. Or have you ever watched an episode of Divorce Court? :rolleyes:

Most American women (part of the circumcising tribe) have no experience with foreskins and think the normal thing is have them cut off.

Bullshit again. There are PLENTY of men in America that have foreskin. Just because a medical procedure is popular in one country than another doesn't mean that everyone is subjected to it.

A foreskin, which is the natural part of a male, gets the "Ewwww" reaction.

Only from people who don't like them. And that's true regardless of what country you live in.

"I wouldn't have sex with anyone who is not cut!" I find that kind of thinking very offensive, not because of the circumcision (an adult male can do whatever he wants to his cock) but because of that kind of brainless reaction. That's vacuity, and when it comes to foreskins too many American women fit the description.

Well I guess you'll just have to stick to your own country and fuck all the broads there, now won't ya? I'm sure there's plenty of straight men around the world who are so disappointed on your decision. Equating an entire nation of women just on the extreme actions of a few. And you have a nerve to call American women vacuous? :rolleyes:
 

tiahuaca

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Posts
125
Media
0
Likes
7
Points
103
If 100% of American are circumcised ...I bet that HIV rate of USA would be more lower than European.
And I think that most of American guys with HIV are uncuts.
 
4

445768

Guest
If 100% of American are circumcised ...I bet that HIV rate of USA would be more lower than European.
And I think that most of American guys with HIV are uncuts.

Circumcision is not some magic cure all so you will not get HIV/AIDS. I know a lot of men who have HIV/AIDS and they are from America and they are ALL cut. I am Poz and I am cut.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
If 100% of American are circumcised ...I bet that HIV rate of USA would be more lower than European.
And I think that most of American guys with HIV are uncuts.

Sorry dude... there's just no scientific evidence to support that. At all. Besides, not every man in America is circumcised. My first BF of 3+ years was uncut and awesome in bed.
 

FuzzyKen

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
2,045
Media
0
Likes
97
Points
193
Gender
Male
I am sorry to say that someone has been badly misinformed. Or some individual here is a member of the maniacal moviement to take an ax to foreskins worldwide.

I am 56 years old. Most of the men in my age group grew up at a time when circumcision was done without even parental permission.

Most of my contemporaries now dead from HIV complications were circumcised. Most older men in my age group now fighting HIV are circumcised.

There is zero coralation between circumcision and HIV transmission.

Circumcision remains neither an advantage or disadvantage. . . . .
 
4

445872

Guest
I am sorry to say that someone has been badly misinformed. Or some individual here is a member of the maniacal moviement to take an ax to foreskins worldwide.

I am 56 years old. Most of the men in my age group grew up at a time when circumcision was done without even parental permission.

Most of my contemporaries now dead from HIV complications were circumcised. Most older men in my age group now fighting HIV are circumcised.

There is zero coralation between circumcision and HIV transmission.

Circumcision remains neither an advantage or disadvantage. . . . .


You say that "most of [your] contemporaries [who are] now dead from HIV complications were circumcised". Am I correct to assume that you, or at least your friends who've passed away from the illness, are/were gay? The reason I bring this up: Gay men who receive unprotected anal sex get the virus sent directly into their colon, so whether or not they're circumcised is going to be an entirely moot point and has no place in this discussion.

Don't get me wrong: I acknowledge and am saddened by their loss, but promiscuous behavior is promiscuous behavior. STDs can enter the body through the mouth, the anus and the vagina, too.
 
Last edited by a moderator: