Circumcision call ‘not for gay men’
Calls for a return to circumcision as a standard practice would only help prevent the spread of HIV among heterosexual men, not gay men.
In the Medical Journal of Australia St Vincent’s Hospital’s Dr Alex Wodak, National Centre in HIV Epidemiology and Clinical Research director David Cooper and Sydney University Molecular Medical Sciences professor Brian Morris wrote that circumcision would help prevent HIV infections in Australia by 2030. They urge Australia to not only encourage the practice, but export it to other countries in the region.
“Male circumcision is one of the most powerful interventions that is currently available in the fight against HIV,” the three wrote.
“The prospect of the availability of a vaccine over the next 20 years is unlikely. Thus, circumcision now to prevent heterosexual HIV transmission in 2030 makes sense … Condom use plus circumcision [is] analogous to seatbelts plus airbags for reducing the road toll.”
“Australia would also be acting compassionately if it promoted infant male circumcision in the Asia–Pacific region, especially in Papua New Guinea where a generalised HIV epidemic has become well established.”
The authors said data from developing nations where HIV was widespread showed circumcision reduced the risk of males catching HIV from females, suggesting countries with far lower HIV rates could benefit too.
“Being a low-prevalence country does not preclude a population-wide approach to HIV prevention … we test pregnant women to prevent cases of vertical HIV transmission. Infant male circumcision would be a comparable, albeit more interventionist, population-wide strategy.”
Dr Gervase Chaney, a member of the Royal Australasian College of Physicians’ Committee for Paediatric Physician Training, told Sydney Star Observer that realities around HIV in Australia were very different to those in developing nations.
“The College does not believe the African data can be directly extrapolated to the Australian or New Zealand circumstance as HIV and other sexually transmitted infections have a much higher prevalence in Africa,” Dr Chaney said.
He said there were also ethical issues to consider when “clearly an infant is unable to consent to a procedure”, and that efforts to educate heterosexuals about the risks of HIV infection would produce better outcomes.
Australian Federation of AIDS Organisations executive director Don Baxter advised caution on circumcising male infants to tackle HIV in straight men.
“There needs to be thorough discussion about the impacts and the value of moving in this direction, particularly in light of the nature of the epidemic in Australia where it is overwhelmingly among gay men and remains around seventy percent so,” he said.
Baxter said there was little evidence to suggest circumcision did much to prevent HIV transmission in gay men, though it was somewhat protective against human papillomavirus (HPV).
However, a vaccine was available for HPV which could be made available on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
You May Also Like
I think this is key: “clearly an infant is unable to consent to a procedure”
Respect for the right of the individual I think is an important step in having a healthy society.
I’m amazed such a practice could be ever be considered a normal and routine procedure. I put it in the same category as cock-piercing – an exciting fetish for some but not something you inflict on babies.
As for the religious aspect, I find starvation for a month (aka Ramadan) and priesthood celibacy appalling as well. Not to mention religious-based homophobia. Hardly traditions that need to be carried on.
Let each person decide when a legal adult what to do with their own genitals for whatever reason. Circumcision of infants along with non-essential surgery on Intersex Infants needs to be banned!
If the child when an adult wants to have it done for religious cosmetic cultural or std reasons or any other then thats their choice which should be supported. But till they are sexually active this std reason is balderdash so it’s not a reason to perform surgery which can still go badly wrong on tiny babies without consent and which they may as an adult regret had been done to them. And people leave religions they grow up in all the time whether changing faiths or going to atheism etc. So religious circumcision is still child abuse as the child may one-day leave that faith.
Let the children choose when adults! In all cases!
Oh yes as a gay activist I have said that “circumcision” or as I prefer to call it “undergoing forced fashion genital mutilation for religious purposes” on males is WRONG and should be outlawed because there is no rational or justifiable basis to continue the cruel practice.
Female genital mutilation is outlawed in nearly all countries now (and so it should continue to be) – now why are young male babies still to this day subject to this cruel and barbaric practice!!!!!
Now I fully acknowledge that it is religious, but a lot of this is purely based on “religious practice” – but have they considered that 1 in every 100 male babies that go and get circumcised die from the practice??????
Or is that because they are men and “real men” get circumcised – just like their fathers were?????
I am very cautious about any article written Brian Morris. He is outspoken in his support for circumcision often drawing on research not relevant to the Australian context to support his claims. His findings are bias and do not consider the full body of research available. Currently there are no medical bodies in the world that recommend routine circumcision of baby boys. There is not enough evidence to support a return to routine circumcision for medical reasons. Not forgetting issues around respect and the rights of a child to body integrity.
I suspect this article will get quite a number of postings. Sex, drugs, pub openings and social events always do. In otherwords, pricks, pills, piss and parties.
More myths to support male genital mutilation…. Australians don’t buy it.
Looking better is a matter of opinion. Reduction of sensitivity is inevitable with circumcision (although circumcised men won’t know that because they can’t compare).
I find ear piercings a good look. I wouldn’t force them on infants, though.
No prizes for guessing if Asquith is circumcised or not. If you don’t understand why people would be against circumcision- how would you feel if people suggested you needed your earlobes cut off- after all they’re not doing anything practical for you!
I’ve never turned away a cute cut guy but I personally think circumcised looks a lot better and I’ve seen quite a few men who were badly scarred by their circumcision.
Unless washing daily and changing your clothes is a challenge for you it’s not difficult to keep clean.
To put things in perspective the number of non-injecting heterosexuals with HIV in Australia is 0.2 percent.
So if we went back to where everyone did it we’d be circumcising 500 non-consenting infants for every heterosexual who forgets to wear a condom and catches HIV, and even then they’d still have to wear a condom to get full protection.
It would be far more ethical (and probably cheaper) to just educate heterosexuals more about HIV and other STIs which the Government does practically nothing on once they leave high school.
If anything we should be banning it from being done to kids – if people want to get circumcised when they’re adults, fine, but don’t foist a decision like that on a child that they then have to live with for the rest of their lives.
I agree with this article, with an uncircumcised penis, bugs can get under the foreskin etc
I don’t understand why people are against circumcision, it makes “it” look better, and it’s clean and way easier to manage!
I think people take the whole circumcision thing to heart becuase lets be frank, no man likes to be told that their wee wee comes second best to another mans wee wee.
@David
Hear hear on the body parts!
I suspect it may lull people into a false sense of security about HIV transmission. Better to look at what’s happening in countries where HIV transmission is dropping or hasn’t taken hold and adopt best practices from those countries.
I also find this form of genital mutilation repugnant and am amazed it is considered normal in some circles. Why not chop off other bits of the human body to avoid infections?
Condoms prevent HIV infection, genital cutting does not. Male circumcision is a dangerous distraction in the fight against HIV.
If Wodak, Cooper, and Morris were promoting a condom with a 40% failure rate, they would be laughed out of the room.
Although I have no medical qualifications, if circumcision helps prevent HIV transmission in heterosexuals and not homosexuals, who would know the sexuality of a child anyway and whether it would be of benefit? Isn’t education about safe sex and access to condoms for all people who have sex the best practice?
Safe sexual practices (condoms) reduce the spread of stds and aids not chopping off the foreskin on an unconsenting baby. Africa studies are known to be flawed and HIV rates in many African countries are in fact rising in spite of circumcision. Educate people on safe sex and leave babies (who are not sexually active mind you) alone