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.

“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.

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…….”

… 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).”

Anyway some STDs (like herpes) can be transmitted even with condoms right? ==> Absolutely, although the risk is greatly reduced.

Anyway some STDs (like herpes) can be transmitted even with condoms right?

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

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.