The fallacy of “Be faithful” as a safe sex message
Dear Solo Bear, thank you very much for taking the time to read and comment ( http://mathialee.wordpress.com/2008/12/27/thorny-issues-with-sex/#comment-232) — I believe discussion is very important, especially when we do not agree. (Addressing your PS first, I don’t know how to enable the function to alert the poster or anyone of replies. If anyone can tell me how to, i’ll be glad to do so)
To me, “Be faithful” as an advice for safe sex, is like telling people to “BE HONEST” as a crime prevention national campaign advice to decrease theft. In both cases, being faithful and being honest are very good moral values that I would applaud anyone for. However, in both cases, you are putting your own safety in the hands of a potential adulter or thief.
Just as, in our crime prevention messages, we tell people, the pickpockets are out there and they are trying to get you, so please be paranoid and zip up your bags properly, we should continue to tell people that husbands are not as faithful as we hope they would be. so please protect yourself.
Just as in our rape prevention messages, we tell people, there are rapist out there, so please don’t go through deserted parks at night, we should continue to tell people that husbands are not as faithful as we hope they would be. so please protect yourself.
Educating husbands to be faithful is great, and yes we should do that. Just like educating the public to respect the consent rights of women, and not rape them in deserted parks is great, and yes we should do that. But just because these educational campaigns are ongoing, and I would say, successful enough, we should never put our lives at risk by walking through deserted parks late at night. Ditto for the husband. The emotional turmoil from having a philandering husband is terrible enough, without having to deal with another problem of HIV.
While the condom is not 100%, when used correctly and consistently, it protects up to 99%, but more importantly, it is the ONLY method of STI prevention during sex.
As for the case of young unmarried girls, I think you’ve mistaken my meaning. I never, and would never, say that they can have a good fling without getting STIs.
My point is that STIs affect EVERYONE the same way, it does not matter whether you are a slut or a housewife, you’re smart or stupid, Christian or athiest, gay or straight, husband or unmarried girl, STIs are non-discriminatory, it affects you the same way in your virgin attempt at sex , or your 100th attempt. And so no matter WHO you are, WHAT you are, how many times you’ve had sex, PLEASE stay safe, and use a condom. And BE PREPARED to use one. Just because you are a great faithful person, who succumbed unintentionally to temptation or peer pressure or whatever, for that JUST one time, and so were caught unprepared,and had unprotected sex, it does not mean that you will be safe. You are at a much higher risk than a gay prostitute who protects himself 100% of the time.
34 Responses
Subscribe to comments with RSS.
[...] To me, “Be faithful” as an advice for safe sex, is like telling people to “BE HONEST” as a crime prevention national campaign advice to decrease theft. In both cases, being faithful and being honest are very good moral values that I … More [...]
The title is incorrect.
“Be Faithful” as a safe sex message is not fallacious, it is in fact the correct message to be spread. Can’t understand why this blog author stands to oppose to the basic moralism of being faithful.
Safe sex should derive from the control of the mind, then the act. Is the human’s mind that lead to inappropriate act.
As mentioned, casual sex is the root of many problems, the evil comes from the mind. It lead to the spread of STD, HIV, broken families and social problems.
Best prevention to the multiple problems is the control of the mind.
I’m not opposed to the basic moralism of being faithful. I do not wish for faithfulness any less than anyone.
But reality has shown that, no matter how faithful we are, no matter how faithful we think or hope our love ones are, they can turn around and betray our trust in their faithfulness.
So the only way we can put the control of our HEALTH in our own hands, is to make sure we use condoms
[...] The fallacy of “Be faithful” as a safe sex message reddit_url=’http://www.baby-parenting.com/baby/babyname/function.include’ reddit_title=’Baby name meaning and origin for Function’ [...]
Condoms is invented and intended for family planning, to control birth rates. It was human behaviour to have diverted its original purpose to use it widely as a “helpful material” to protect against STD spreading via casual sex. It’s primary purpose is birth control, secondary is to protect against STD. Now, due to the arbitrariness of human self-control, the condoms primary and secondary purpose has switched places.
Blog writter seems to emphasize a great deal that using a condoms is wonderful. As if with condoms, you can do whatever you want with whoever you like.
Be careful, do not influence the public that to accept that casual sex is okay as long as you have condoms in your pocket. Please please, do the nation a favour, no need to help Durex, Durex should have their own A&P programmes to promote their condoms.
Dear public, be faithful as much as you can. Unless you are having some hidden reason similar to the blog writer (in the idea of supporting casual sex).
Why do people always think that educating people on condom use is equals to promoting casual sex? Times have changed, you may not like it but planting your head in the sand and ignoring what people are doing won’t change anything. You can’t blame sex education for promoting casual sex when casual sex has long existed before and condom use for the sake of mitigating the spread of diseases came up only after the effects of widespread casual sex. This is precisely what happened in World War 1 when American soldiers were denied condoms and the result was 70% of ‘em were infected with venereal diseases and because of that, the government began promoting condom use.
You say that the best prevention is ‘the control of the mind’. And how, do you reckon, we go about advocating to the public to do that? Isn’t it clear by now that abstinence-only education do not work? People have sex ANYWAY in fact, “the teens pledging to stay away from sex actually participated in sexual activities in less safe manners than other teenagers that did not take an abstinence pledge.” from http://www.itwire.com/content/view/22490/1066/1/1/
You can’t merely encourage and hope for the best while withholding far more effective means to curb the spread of disease. “Be faithful as much as you can” isn’t going to help the housewife whose adulterous husband think it’s his duty to plough every furrow he fancies as Mathia pointed out.
Hey, maybe with mandatory monthly screenings, your advice will work. That way, we can stop promoting condom use and people won’t have casual sex right? Don’t pass the test, don’t have sex with wifey. Or anyone for that matter. Unless they’re also pure.
Seriously, unless you can come up with an effective plan that doesn’t involve condom use in curbing the spread of STDs/STIs, enough already with appeals to morals. They don’t work, they’re just not enough.
Thanks Antianera, I think the points and the EVIDENCE that you raised, are really excellent! I think the American WW1 was a real case in point, a lesson that unfortunately, many conservatives, have not learnt. And the results are of course seen in the statistics, which again, you have pointed out. I’m really hoping that someone in Singapore would do a similar study here. I think organisations like AWARE or AFA would be interested to provide some sort of organisational support, but these are volunteer run, so if there is anyone interested to volunteer to help do similar studies with us, please contact these organisations or contact me mathialee@yahoo.com. Don’t worry about having to do all the research single-handedly; there’ll be other volunteers — I for one, would definately one to be a part of the research team = )
[...] the universe and everything – Mathia Lee: The fallacy of “Be faithful” as a safe sex message – Wild Shores of Singapore: Stars on Sembawang Beach? – Wet Calamari: The Doll Affair 2008 event [...]
Sex and condom…..driving and seat belt….if you don’t use it, you take a risk….if you use it, you might still be harmed but at least you get some peace of mind…sure, the seat belt was intended for safe driving and not reckless racing….but it still protects the driver, right?
There are about 10 million women worldwide who have been completely faithful to their spouses who are currently infected with HIV.
People need to learn how to use condoms – even married people. It saves lives.
we need to develop condoms for the mouth too.
good luck.
Thanks! Yep oral sex does transmit STIs as well. In fact, the incidence of STIs amongst teens (US study, i can’t find the citation at this moment) being transmitted through oral sex is on the rise, because no protection is used there, while condoms are used for vaginal/anal sex.
http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/sexual_health/sti/oralsex.htm
[...] Parties 2008 – God’s wonderful creation: Mysterious patch reefs of Singapore – Mathia Lee: The fallacy of “Be faithful” as a safe sex message – Wild Shores of Singapore: Stars on Sembawang Beach? – Wet Calamari: The Doll Affair 2008 event [...]
Going to comment here for the fun of it… kekeke
“Why do people always think that educating people on condom use is equals to promoting casual sex?”
WHY???
Let me use an analogy – That of a woman giving birth.
If you go to the hospital, especially those of developed countries, you will find many many women opting for pain relief while giving birth. Medically, most of these women can do without the pain relief.
The pain relief is a backdoor. Once there is a backdoor, people will tend to abuse it. In this case, when the women think they can’t take the pain anymore, they will scream for the doctor to stick them with the pain relief. BUT, when you tell them that it is too late to stick them (i.e. removing the backdoor), they will endure through the pain and give birth anyway.
In the same way, educating people (unmarried) on condom use is giving them a form of backdoor.
Yes, the “Be faithful” message/policy is not 100% foolproof. Many people will challenge that message.
Yet, if you turn it around and ask these people, do you have a better message/policy that works better than “Be faithful” for the whole population? The answer is NO.
Now, imagine that you want to have children. So, that means you cannot use condom and in the context of this blog, you are taking a huge risk.
How about this… You are going to get married, and your future spouse tell you, I want to see your medical report before I sign the marriage certificate. How does that feel? Or… “You want me to be your bf/gf? Go for regular testing first.” How does that feel?
Statistically, if there are 3 billion women in the world, and there are 10 million faithful women worldwide infected with HIV, then that’s a really small percentage. You can’t help it when such things happen.
First, we must have a broad overview, then we look into the problem areas. Always focusing on the problem areas gives rise to a skewed perspective.
1. the point of checking is to get treated so that i can be your bf/gf/your kid’s parent, without me getting STIs. If I break up with you or don’t accept you on learning you have an STI then i don’t really love you for who you are, warts and all, and so i really shouldn’t be with you.
2. How does it feel that if you want my med report to marry me?
How do I feel that you need a legal paper called the marriage certificate for you to stay married to me?
Point 1 – If your bf/gf have HIV, will you still get married with him/her? If your bf/gf have HIV, and ask you to leave him/her, will you do it? If your bf/gf is consistently going for casual sex (maybe because of super high sex drive, more than you can cope), but use a condom, will you still accept him/her?
Biologically / Survival-Instincts will be screaming at you to stay away from said person. If one were to bring in the issue of love, acceptance and non-discrimination, then one must also contend with the issue of society values/morals/religion.
Point 2 – The legal paper is a physical form of commitment. Philosophically or ideally, there shouldn’t be any legal paper. But humans being humans, the legal paper serves its purpose. It is also that piece of legal paper and marital (or bf/gf) status (i.e. titles that have zero philosophically value) that reminds people about reconciliation.
It is amazing how humans talk so much about ideals when humans are not perfect beings.
Point 1 — you asking me , or you asking in general? I can’t speak for the general. But for me, yes, HIV status is irrelavent to marriage. If i don’t marry him, it may be because of the actions he took which made him contract HIV, and because actions reflect a person’s character. If my partner asks me to leave for whatever reason, HIV or otherwise, I think i’ll have to, if not its considered harassment, and they can take a protection order against harrassers.
Anyway STI testing not just for HIV lah. Majority of STIs can be treated, so why not treat first before passing it on?
Point 2 — i know alot of people who don’t talk about ideals and don’t bother aiming for ideals
I think it all depends on individuals and their choice lah
Of course asking in general. This is afterall public comments.
“If i don’t marry him, it may be because of the actions he took which made him contract HIV, and because actions reflect a person’s character.”
–> Ah… So there’s a judgement. I thought you said to “love you for who you are, warts and all”.
“If my partner asks me to leave for whatever reason, HIV or otherwise, I think i’ll have to, if not its considered harassment, and they can take a protection order against harrassers.”
–> What an extreme response! I hypothesize that you have an extreme skewed perspective. If you read in context, it means that your partner thinks he is doomed, don’t want you to suffer. Harassment is possibly the last thing on his mind.
By the way, while you are telling everyone to “be prepared” and “stay safe”, perhaps you should add in a message to tell everyone how to have children while being prepared and staying safe.
And I would also like to see some additional educational message/materials to tell everyone how to avoid getting STIs practically. In reality, I don’t think people (especially couples) start the act with put condom, do, and done. Put-Do-Done is probably only found in rape (KO victims) and prostitution. And I believe that the scientific tests focused on the property of the condom rather than how STIs get transmitted even with the use of the condom.
” So there’s a judgement. I thought you said to “love you for who you are, warts and all”. ” — Hmm maybe we both have a different understanding of what makes up a person in mind…… but thats the realm of the Philosophy of a Human Person…… huge topic, huge digression. Anyway, that was my own living principles which i will not impose on anyone, and probably don’t represent the majority anyway……
I would just stick to advocating for the right and freedom to choose whether or not you want to marry a HIV patient, and having the right to the information to make the choice (hence the testing; which by the way, is internationally advocated, incl the WHO), and having access(physical and financial) to the drugs/ contraceptives necessary to minimise one’s risk.
You are very right in pointing out that simply asking people to use the condom is insufficient. There are a lot of practicalities to consider, and this is also very culturally influenced. While I wouldn’t claim AWARE’s programme is 100% effective, we do acknowlege that need, and hence include negotiation and communication skills as part of our programme. We also have role playing exercises, to identify BEHAVIORAL risks, and we have condom demonstrations and practice sessions to ensure that we impart as much SKILLS to the students as possible.
As for scientific studies, both type of studies have been done. Those testing the properties of the condom, usually done by the companies themselves, claim 99% effectiveness. As for the effectiveness of the condom in reality, these are usually done by independent medical researchers. Please see http://mathialee.wordpress.com/2008/12/23/condoms-85-or-99-effective/
I would recommend everyone to also do your independent research, if you are interested enough to.
http://www.pubmed.com
If you come across interesting research articles, do share them with me, mathialee@yahoo.com
thanks!
You forgot the part on “how to have children while being prepared and staying safe”…kekeke
Negotiation? Communication? Behavioral risks? How is that going to help a faithful wife/husband avoid getting STIs practically from an unfaithful husband/wife?
With regards to the scientific testing, I do not think it is comprehensive enough. The fact is, medical researchers (although independent) was not in control of the “experiments”. I don’t think the medical researchers drew up different patterns of the act and get thousands of people to do it while they observe.
“how to have children while being prepared and staying safe”… — The less safe method : check your STI status, check again 3 months after . After pregnancy, check your status again. Get treated if you have an STI and are pregnant. Pregnancy has always been a risky business.
The more safe method : Practiced when 1 partner has HIV: In vitro fertilisation.
But seriously, the above looks ridiculous.
It’s always very tough when it comes to a marriage. And the State or any organisation or anyone outside really has no business telling you what to do. All they can tell you, and have the responsibility to tell you are the facts , ie. Causes, and the consequences. Then it becomes up to the people within the marriage to decide how much risk they want to take, based on as much information as you can get. So my point really is, give all the info possible, do not withhold any info, and then let the couple decide. And part of this info is that , yes , the majority of female STI patients contracted it from their husbands/exclusive partner
Hey CM, if you get a grant and do the research you are proposing, i’ll be most supportive! In fact, i promise you that if no one else publishes you, I will!
HIV can still get through the less safe method. And by the time it is detected, too late. A pregnant woman with HIV – the worst case scenario.
Well, as you say, “majority of female STI patients contracted it from their husbands/exclusive partner”… and yet up to now there are no propagated practical information about how to carry out the act (i.e. what pattern can use, what pattern cannot use) with a condom. Short of put-do-done, which we know is not going to work for potential female STI patients who will get STI from their husband/exclusive partner. Perhaps you have more info on this?
If my proposed project gets approved with sufficient volunteers/paid-couples, it is going into Nature, not some grubby WordPress Blog… kekeke
My draconian solution is to have mandatory regular testing and quarantine people with curable STIs until they are cured. For non-curable STIs, it is permanent quarantine. People who skip testing and/or hide their condition gets extreme punishment (to generate a climate of fear).
I guarantee you, in one generation, certain STIs (like HIV) will disappear from the face of the Earth – unless some idiot decides to keep it as a bio-weapon.
Conceiving through intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection has quite a good record (not perfect, but good) of keeping out the HIV. but damn costly lah
Pregnant with HIV — not that bad lah………..
There are drugs which the pregnant mother can take to reduce the chance of her baby getting HIV to below 5%(I think. can’t remember off hand). And with the drugs available now, the mother can live up to her baby’s 40th birthday.
I’ll watch out for your paper in Nature = D
Hey, you’re discriminating against me. I told you i’m willing to marry a person with HIV, so why quarantine him?
And look at the rates for HPV (According to a 1997 American Journal of Medicine article, nearly three in four Americans between the ages of 15 and 49 have been infected with genital HPV at some point in their life.)
, herpes (20% of the Brit population carry it) , Hep B…… it will end up more cost-effective if you quarantine the perfectly healthy instead
Well, it is draconian, it is discrimination. It is very objective oriented – to stamp out as many STIs as possible effectively.
The healthy gets to live in nice big open spaces, while those infected stays in 1-2 room HDB-like apartments. And like SG-Inc, they still have to pay for it, however I will be nice and sell it at cost. I will also be kind and allow visitation by family members only. Alternatively you can choose to get infected.
I believe no other solution is more effective. I cannot stamp out human unfaithfulness, it has been around for thousands of years but I sure can stamp out a lot of STIs.
Unfortunately, humans are smart as well as silly, nobody will support such a good and effective plan. So, STIs are here to stay. Condom use can fail, faithfulness can fail, and thus the human race suffers.
*speechless*
Yay, speechless… Here’s another one!
Since it’s so difficult to get people to agree and fund a comprehensive scientific test – where different patterns of the act are being performed to determine which patterns keep STI transmission to the minimum while using a condom – I have a solution!
I suggest, Mathia volunteers herself (for the good of mankind!!!) for the project!!! Here’s how it goes… First infect Mathia with a curable STI. Then get thousands of healthy (read: STI free) men to volunteer (which should be very very easy) for the project.
Sure, get into Nature or higher impact factor medical journals! Plus Straits Times AND all major newspaper.
For the good of mankind!!!
Please remain *speechless* if all you are going to say is – “No thanks”.
Kekeke.
absolutely *speechless*
my dear OTHER readers. I know CM in real life. So i feel compelled to defend his reputation. I know he can be a very smart and nice guy. =p
Depending on the STD many men might not mind haha
Anyway some STDs (like herpes) can be transmitted even with condoms right?
Depending on the STD many men might not mind haha ==> Should a girl be flattered or offended by such statements? I’ve always wondered.
Anyway some STDs (like herpes) can be transmitted even with condoms right? ==> Absolutely, although the risk is greatly reduced.
Well, I told my friend “no one wants to rape you” and she got offended
… women
Nono, I mean the condom doesn’t appreciably reduce the risk of transmission
“Condoms do not protect against infections spread from sores on the skin not covered by a condom (such as the base of the penis or scrotum).”
“Condoms do not protect against infections spread from sores on the skin not covered by a condom (such as the base of the penis or scrotum).”
== > That’s a scientifically proven statement
“Anyway some STDs (like herpes) can be transmitted even with condoms right? ==> Absolutely, although the risk is greatly reduced.”
Maybe a new topic should be started… “The fallacy of “using condoms” as a safe sex message”. kekeke.
According to losinglove.lee (29-Dec-08 at 7:19 pm), “Condoms is invented and intended for family planning, to control birth rates…….”
*looks around to see if there are no teens*
This comment is rated R21
“The fallacy of “using condoms” as a safe sex message”.
In planning comprehensive sex ed programs (in general, not specific to singapore), this is a HUGE debate.
Why?
Scientifically speaking, we know that stuff like HPV and herpes can spread, even with condom use, if sores are uncovered by the condom
YET, when you make a big deal about the shortcomings of condoms, sexually active teens justify their lack of condom use with these “facts”, when in fact they do not use condoms for a whole host of other reasons. This is a documented observation.
Since the condom is the ONLY contraceptive that offers any STI protection at all (and is effective against HIV), and since it is documented that teens rather go without condoms, than go with abstinence once they are told of the condom’s shortcommings, for the sake of health, we tell, but play down the emphasis.
——————————————–
According to losinglove.lee (29-Dec-08 at 7:19 pm), “Condoms is invented and intended for family planning, to control birth rates…….”
Now, i actually know this losinglove.lee in real life, so I know where she is coming from. I’m going to protect her identity here of course, but its very interesting to see where people come from, and then look at the message they verbalise, and then think of the validity of such messages when you encounter them elsewhere in future.
Losinglove.lee had a partner who betrayed her ( at the point of writing that comment), but who “protected” losinglove.lee by using a condom with the extra-relational affair partner. Losinglove.lee who always trusted her partner previously, did not consistently use condoms, which put her own health at risk.
The way I interpret her statement, she is trying to justify her own risky behavior, and condemn her partner’s unfaithfulness, with that statement. It wasn’t really a health statement she was trying to make.
So see why I always take prescriptions with a pinch of salt? There are always these layers of complexity beneath, and without the context and the personal experience, its very easy to mistake such statements as morallistic facts.
“……sexually active teens justify their lack of condom use with these “facts”, when in fact they do not use condoms for a whole host of other reasons……”
Ah, finally you see the difference between theory, ideals and practicality.
If I have my way (legislate me with power!!!), I prefer a climate of fear (drown-them-in-a-pig-cage kind) and pressure (kill-1-to-warn-a-hundred kind). Afterall, some people are peer pressured/influenced to have sex anyway. Then we can dispense with all the fallacy debate, yah?
————————————
Regardless of losinglove.lee’s background, her statement is still valid. She may or may not have some motive in making that statement but the statement itself holds merit.
Tsk tsk tsk… so unprofessional you are.
Now, I do not know what led to losinglove.lee’s circumstances, but I do encounter some real life observations which led me to conclude that some women seem to have this behaviour of lying to themselves.
Before committing to a bf/gf relationship, some bad behaviours on the part of the guys are already apparent. And during the bf/gf relationship, more bad behvaiours show up. YET, these women chose to turn a blind eye (love is blind? or silly?) and well, you guess it, same old drama – better than Media Corp drama sometimes.
In other cases, the ladies do not behave their part and make strenuous demands on the guys until “breaking point”.
Consider this… How did unfaithfulness come about? What’s the cause? Did it magically appear?
Now, back to gender neutrality. “Be faithful” message cannot stand by itself. It must be coupled with practical information on relationship management for BOTH parties. This information on relationship management (a relatively big topic itself) is obviously lacking when people use “be faithful” as a safe sex message, hence the fallacy of the message.
AND, to advocate condom use because of fallacy of the “be faithful” message. In my opinion, that is simply avoiding the root of the issue and opening a can of worms – that’s why there’s so much debate.