Wednesday, August 16, 2006

Bill Clinton ponders mandatory circumcision

Can't keep it in your pants? Don't understand the concept of cleaning all crevasses of the body? Snip some skin, celebrate diversity and line up for some government appropriated cash.

Bill Clinton called for the world to prepare to tackle the cultural taboos surrounding circumcision yesterday if, as many expect, trials show that it protects men and the women they sleep with from Aids.

In a speech to the International Aids conference in Toronto, Canada, Mr Clinton said that if the trials had good results, there would be a major job of persuasion ahead. "Should this be shown to be effective, we will have another means to prevent the spread of the disease and to save lives, and we will have a big job to do," he said. "It is important that as we leave here we all be prepared for a green light that could have a staggering impact on the male population but that will be frankly a lot of trouble to get done."

The problems would be most obvious in India where Muslims are circumcised but Hindus are not, and the difference is associated with religious identity. During sectarian violence, men have been known to pull down each other's trousers as a means of identifying friend from enemy.
If only it were that easy...

Fogging up The Broom

6 comments:

Honey Pot said...

...honestly, I just can't see guys allowing someone to be hacking away at their boys. Billy should have just demonstrated the old cigar trick on a cpr dummy, (not sure if they come with a hole down there)...... worked for him, and it would save their peckers from the plague.

basil said...

How on Earth does removing the protective layer of skin from the penis save anyone from AIDS? I'd have thought a thick layer of skin would prevent the sort of damage through which contaminated blood is transfered. I suspect controlling the number of partners you have will better contain the spread AIDS than punishing those whose members are intact with Nature's own sensitivity enhancing protection.

Honey Pot said...

From what I read about it Basil, it appears that the hiv virus can live comfortable in the sheath or the foreskin. There is a theory out there that it will lesson the chance of transmission if the foreskin is removed. Sort of a dumb thing to promote, as males will think if they have a circumcision they will not be prone to getting, nor spreading HIV. I think condoms is not a good approach either, no one wants to wear them. Promoting no sex is another dumb one, humans like sex and the urge usually beats out the fear factor. Best to just spend the money on research for a vaccine.

basil said...

Not having sex is the best means of avoiding AIDS - plain and simple. This unpopular approach should always be promoted whether the self pleasuring masses can accept this truth or not.

Having Willy Clinton at an AIDS conference is a joke. His world renown personal example of the irresponsible self serving power-wielding sexual libertine speaks for itself.

Promoting condom use as the key to perventing AIDS is not an ideal approach because they are by no means 100% effective and give a false sense of security. But if people can't be bothered to at least take that precaution . . . it's kind of like not wearing a seatbelt or living off fast food with no exercise. Avoiding these choices does not guarantee a long and prosperous life but they don't usually hurt your chances of doing so. We should still promote this precaution.

Men ought to know enough to cleanse themselves. That said, I suspect if HIV is living beneath foreskin it is also within the body fluids: Game over, sheath or not.

Honey Pot said...

Well Basil, I am not giving up sex. As long as I can get them drunk enough, and am healthy enough to throw them over my shoulder to drag home, I will be doing the wild monkey dance. I don't care if I have to wrap myself in saran wrap with a glow light between my knees, I am doing the deed.

Pietr said...

Hey,baby,I don't need to take the TEST, I'm one of the chosen!