(AVfM News) AVfM recently published a story about the United Nations and World Health Organization’s plan to circumcise twenty eight million men, boys and infants in Sub Saharan Africa over the next five years. Since then, our ongoing research on the issue has produced more information.
Adding to what is becoming a furor in the medical community over the ethics and efficacy of circumcision as a tool in the war against AIDS, the Journal of Public Health in Africa published an article written by Dr. Robert S. Van Howe and Dr. Michelle R. Storms of Michigan State University in December of last year. The article was just short of an excoriation of the Orange Farm study and WHO policy concerning the massive drive to circumcise an immense portion of the male population in Southern Africa. Using very strong language for a medical journal piece the authors in the article entitled “How the circumcision solution in Africa will increase HIV infections” stated in the abstract:
Based on our analysis it is concluded that the circumcision solution is a wasteful distraction that takes resources away from more effective, less expensive, less invasive alternatives. By diverting attention away from more effective interventions, circumcision programs will likely increase the number of HIV infections.
The article goes on to point out the problems with the Orange Farm study and its failure to provide any real scientific evidence that circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection for heterosexual males. Also covered are the lack of biological plausibility, compensation behavior and lack of consistent epidemiological evidence in much larger populations around the world. Also discussed in the article was a survey of men who had undergone the procedure in which it was reported that a substantial number of them were given promotional material telling them circumcision was an effective method to prevent HIV infection. The authors flatly stated that the policy was misguided -a strong term in medical circles- and meticulously draws a cost-benefit analysis of other methods such as condoms (the most effective method) for deterring the spread of AIDS.
This article and others like it came out on the heels of a much publicized speech given by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on November 8, 2011, at the National Institute of Heath in Bethesda Maryland where she announced Helen DeGeneres as the new Special Envoy for Global AIDS Awareness. During the speech Clinton repeatedly mentioned a combination prevention strategy winch involved preventing mother to newborn infections, male circumcision, and antiretroviral drugs. Condom use was only mentioned as an afterthought in her speech. In fact circumcision was one of the key themes of her speech being mentioned often and it was also pointed out that of the one million circumcisions performed in Africa since 2007, three quarters of them were funded by PEPFAR- the Presidents Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. The word “condoms” was used only once in the entire speech.
Another key theme in Clinton’s speech was gender equality. She states the need for “institutional changes” including “reducing discrimination against women and girls; stopping gender-based violence and exploitation, which continue to put women and girls at higher risk of HIV infection,” was a major tone setter for her speech. She stated that 60% of all people in Sub Saharan Africa infected with HIV are women and girls. In fact, epidemiological data published by UNIAIDS reports that this is true only in Sub Equatorial Africa and in no other region. Virtually everywhere else in the world it is men who comprise the majority of those infected with HIV.
The most implied explination for the discrepancy between southern Africa and other areas of the world is that there is something particularly anti female about the region and that it is a gender equality issue. However, there is no discernible difference between the economic and legal condition of women in Africa compared to other under developed areas in the world and no particular factor other than gender has been identified. There is, however, a discernible difference between the legal and social condition of homosexuals, particularly gay men, in Africa and the rest of the world. In most every country in Sub Equatorial Africa homosexuality is punishable by a prison sentence. In some cases the sentence is life long and spent in a labor camp. Yet again, in several countries like Uganda and Somalia either public flogging or the death sentence is prescribed. Many activists and epidemiologists have noted that this may be a major cause in the reluctance of men to get tested in Africa and leads to a skewing of the data. Critics of the Orange Farm study point out the reluctance of participants to divulge their sexual behavior as a factor in the studies fallibility.
The habit of linking rates of HIV infection with perceived gender inequality is ubiquitous throughout the army of people implementing the WHO’s initiative. In fact Dr. Katherine Hankins, Chief Scientific Advisor for UNIAIDS and only medical doctor present at the UNAIDS–PEPFAR Southern & Eastern Africa Region Male Circumcision Communication Meeting, where the plan for “scale up” was put together, is a ardent believer in this rather unscientific notion.
Dr. Hankins’ career has been characterized more by AIDS activism in non governmental organizations than clinical or research work. After finishing her medical degree in Canada, she spent a short time practicing with her father and then joined the Calgary Board of Public Health in Calgary, Alberta, where she eventually served for several years as Deputy Medical Officer of Health. When the AIDS crisis became acute in the mid 80′s she re-located to Montreal where there were a large number of cases present.
She focused her efforts on women with AIDS during that time period. In a 1989 address to the Fifth annual International Conference on AIDS in Montreal she stated: “Until we are economically equal, with pay equity and equal distribution of care giving responsibilities whether for the sick, the elderly, for children or the dependent women will not be in a position where they can fully protect themselves from HIV infection.” She presented no evidence to support this claim during this address and to this day there has been no scientific research that shows any link whatsoever with pay equity, and or gender roles with the incidence of HIV infection.
Since becoming the Chief Scientific Advisor for UNIAIDS Dr. Hankins has focused primarily on the needs of women affected with AIDS, strongly promoting antiviral drugs to reduce the rate of transfer of HIV from mother to child. There has never been any program or policy initiated or overseen by her that focuses solely on the needs of men affected with AIDS or prevention for men aside from the current drive for mass circumcision.
Not only has the AIDS epidemic and HIV infection been touted as a gender equality issue, but circumcision itself has become a symbol of gender equality and social change, as purported by the operatives on the ground in Africa. Ayanda Nqeketo , mentioned in the previous article on the subject, has been very busy in Swaziland in promoting male circumcision as an “entry point” for a gender based ideology that will supposedly change social norms and somehow benefit women and promote reproductive health. She states in an opinion piece, “Public attitudes on sexual, reproductive issues,” featured in the Swazi Observer on December 31 of last year:
Public opinion and attitude is often the yardstick against which interventions are made. Perhaps this is due to conventional gender roles ascribed to both sexes by educational programs focusing on sexuality. Male roles are often stereotypically understood as that of being breadwinners who work outside the home and thus not fundamentally relevant to reproduction as much as production. Females, on the other hand, were supposed to be responsible for domestic issues, which include reproduction and raising children. These gender based understandings of male and female roles nevertheless tended to assume that women acted as independent decision makers on matters related to their reproductive health, e.g. the number of children to have, use of contraceptives, etc. Yet a number of studies done among males in African countries show that some men exert profound influence on the contraceptive choices their partners could make and on the number of children they have. If men play such an important role in reproductive health it is imperative for me to focus my discussion today on male circumcision and respect for women in the context of male circumcision intervention as the entry point.
She continues later in the piece:
Male Circumcision intervention should be used to change sexual attitudes, practices and expand masculinity work with men and boys. There is now a body of international and national evidence pointing to the efficacy of gender-based work with men and boys in shaping attitudes and practices around gender and sexuality. Investment is required to scale up these efforts, and in particular to fund the training of an increased number of male peer educators who can lead this work. As this work is scaled up, it will be important to put training, support and monitoring systems in place to ensure the quality of work done, and to maintain a focus on male power and privilege, and their impact on women’s lives, as well as notions and practices of masculinity, and their impact on men’s lives. Individually-targeted and small, peer group interventions aiming to support self-defined behavioral change and shift social norms may be appropriate for this population. Health care institutions identified for MC must be utilized for these HIV preventive messaging. There is still much that is unknown or poorly understood about the complexities of men’s sexualities and vulnerabilities, and how these relate to women’s sexualities and vulnerabilities, that requires more ethnographically sophisticated research.
Also mentioned in her article are references to male violence and rape.
As with the argument that HIV infection rates are somehow linked to gender inequality, the argument that circumcision can be used as a tool to rectify the percieved and or imagined errors in social norms caries with it absolutely no proof and virtually nothing is done to convince target audiences that there is any link whatsoever. No links to reproductive health, no links to male privilege no links to gender violence….nothing. There is nothing more than an assertion, and in response to it comes millions upon millions of dollars and an incalculable amount of international political support.
Sources:
http://www.avoiceformen.com/featured/28000000-african-men-to-be-coerced-by-u-n-to-make-the-cut/
http://www.zimeye.org/wp-content/live_images/2012/01/44-419-1-PB.pdf
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2011/11/176810.htm
http://www.unaids.org/en/dataanalysis/epidemiology/
http://www.avert.org/gay-africa-hiv-aids.htm#contentTable3
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1452470/pdf/cmaj00227-0118.pdf
http://www.observer.org.sz/index.php?news=33853
Tags: Circumcision, Feminism, Radical Feminism, United Nations, World Health Organization
32 Posts in Total
donations either one-time or on a monthly subscription basis.
If you don't have paypal, check out the other options.
If you want to get some merchandise and sponsor us at the same time, consider the AVfM store.
Stu:
Jean Valjean:
Charbroil:
Peegies:
Doug1:
Special comment from the News Director:
If you are reading this and you are anywhere in Sub Saharan Africa PLEASE get in touch with me! My email is vfm_news@yahoo.com. I am particularly interested in the media campaigns to promote circumcision and the thoughts of any medical professionals that practice in the region or work for government organizations there.
I intend to write more about this and your input would be greatly appreciated not just by me but by many many readers.
Regards
Robert O’Hara
OT: Car pool for April 15, 2012.
Should we start organizing transportation for “Sink Misandry”?
I live in the NE. I will drive from Long Island, through NYC, Philadelphia and on to DC. I have a large van that can accommodate up to 7 people.
This is it.
Feminists, working through the UN and WHO, are behind the plan to genitally mutilate millions of African men.
The thinking is that mutilating men’s genitals will empower women.
It’s right here in black and white.
“Public opinion and attitude is often the yardstick against which interventions are made.”
If public opinion does not intervene against feminists mutilating millions of men’s genitals, they will have reached that ‘yardstick’ and will reach for the next.
This is entirely about harming men. The people pushing this cannot be ignorant about all the research to the contrary. They know, and they don’t care; this is an opportunity to harm millions of men. That is what is going on.
The brain just shuts down when faced with the idiocy of what the W.H.O. et al is attempting to do.
Using their rational the women of Africa should as well be circumcised in an attempt to help thwart the spread of h.i.v. / aids. It will after all be just as effective as doing it to men.
How these medical professionals who are throwing their support behind this got their license is beyond any sane persons understanding.
I suspect most are Moslems, Jews, or from the Anglosphere, where there is chronic cultural bias in favour of male genital mutilation(circumcision).
I saw a medical programme on TV in the UK, broadcast in the last week, that completely misrepresented the case about circumcision. The doctor presenting the piece neglected to mention most of the known functions of the foreskin, and suggested circumcision for conditions that are better treated in other ways. Treatments like preputioplasty and laser ablation, weren’t even mentioned at all. The programme actually showed a man being circumcised for phimosis(tight foreskin), without any other more conservative treatment being employed first! This is not good practice. Even the British Medical Association criticises its overuse, although it is 100 times more prevalent in the US!
It’s difficult to suppress the amount of rage I feel after reading this. How do we stop this? How do we get enough people on board to get the U.N. to quit this? Better yet…..how do we get millions of African men to stand up and kick these assholes out of their personal business, and tell the supporting women to go fuck themselves?
I still don’t think that organized feminists are actively lobbying for this. The only groups that I can find that are actively lobbying are catholics and jews.
Quite frankly, I can’t tell the difference between catholics and feminists in this regard.
http://www.crsprogramquality.org/storage/pubs/general/Gender_web.pdf
Is there any difference or is our perception of what it is to be feminist so poorly defined?
Who are the ideologues?
Responses to the global HIV/AIDS epidemic are often driven not by evidence but by ideology, stereotypes, and false assumptions.
The one medical intervention that has now been proven effective according to the highest standards of scientific research is male circumcision, which reduces a man’s risk of HIV transmission by more than half. Lack of male circumcision, along with high rates of long-term concurrent sexual partnerships, likely accounts for the hyperepidemics of southern Africa. But even many advocates of male circumcision believe that it needs to be promoted along with partner reduction.
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/medical_ethics/me0126.htm
Did you read that? Catholics criticizing ideologues and then proclaiming the Orange Farm Study as ” the highest standards of scientific research”
The mainstream feminist movement (i.e. the funfems) aren’t actively lobbying for this.
Individuals with the power to make this happen have justified it on feminist grounds, per Robert’s piece.
Male genital mutilation is the first step to whatever they think ‘equality’ means. So far it seems to mean taking action to prevent violence against women, and taking action to ensure violence against men.
“Male roles are often stereotypically understood as that of being breadwinners who work outside the home and thus not fundamentally relevant to reproduction as much as production.”
Okay, I’ve been out of touch for a while, but when did males become less fundamentally relevant to reproduction???
The knowledge that Hilary Clinton is speaking out in favour of this plan gives me goosebumps.
I don’t know of any particular feminists lobbying for more circumcision in Africa, but this is surely a prime example of institutionalized misandry run amok. Feminist or not, it’s time to FTSU in a major way.
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the largest single contributor to WHO, (2nd only to the US government). Therefore they have the most influence over how the money is spent.
trevor_mundel@gatesfoundation.org
He’s the key guy there overseeing health programs, such as HIV prevention.
(Also, a major contributor has always been the Rockefeller Foundation. Remember them?)
Every time I read about this issue two thoughts come to mind.
First the fact that anyone could think of cutting off a part of another human and condone it in anyway short of gangrene or cancer, makes me question humanity in general.
But second, I wonder why now the outcry against circumcision where is it every time a child is circumcised in the US under the guise of parental choice?
Don’t get me wrong, this initiative is monstrous, but so is American law in this regard. If it wasn’t legal here they would have no legal or ethical leg to stand on to push it on other nations.
“The knowledge that Hillary Clinton is speaking out in favour of this plan gives me goosebumps.”
The Wicked Witch of the West.
From the USAID report “LEVELS AND SPREAD OF HIV SEROPREVALENCE AND ASSOCIATED FACTORS: EVIDENCE FROM NATIONAL HOUSEHOLD SURVEYS”
“There appears no clear pattern of association between male circumcision and HIV prevalence—in 8 of 18 countries with data, HIV prevalence is lower among circumcised men, while in the remaining 10 countries it is higher.”
http://www.measuredhs.com/pubs/pdf/CR22/CR22.pdf
The South African National Communication Survey on HIV/AIDS, 2009 found that 15% of adults across age groups “believe that circumcised men do not need to use condoms”.
http://www.info.gov.za/issues/hiv/survey_2009.htm
From the committee of the South African Medical Association Human Rights, Law & Ethics Committee :
“the Committee expressed serious concern that not enough scientifically-based evidence was available to confirm that circumcisions prevented HIV contraction and that the public at large was influenced by incorrect and misrepresented information. The Committee reiterated its view that it did not support circumcision to prevent HIV transmission.”
The one randomized controlled trial into male-to-female transmission showed a 54% higher rate in the group where the men had been circumcised btw:
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(09)60998-3/abstract
ABC (Abstinence, Being faithful, and especially Condoms) is the way forward. Promoting genital surgery will cost African lives, not save them.
So this is it?
Is this our think tank to figure out who’s behind all of this, what it is they actually do, and what their real interests are?
I’d like to address a few things that jump out at me that this article addresses.
The first is the despicable idea that circumcision, particularly the circumcision of males, is this “tool” for “gender equality.” What kind of crack, were they smoking when they conceptualized this idea? But furthermore, what kind of dope are they smoking at the WHO, and at these so-called AIDS conventions, that it is swimmingly being accepted and adopted? How did they manage to mash the concept of “male circumcision” and “gender equality” together?
That’s the first crock. The second crock is the idea that you can use male circumcision to alter a man’s behavior.
Seriously?
Just to think about this idiotic idea sends me reeling.
How can anyone, with a straight face try and argue that the solution to the AIDS crisis, the way circumcision works is by bringing in the men for the procedure, and then “seizing the opportunity” to teach them about abstinence and condoms? Are they fucking kidding me?
Like, do you need to bash in a man’s teeth, so that when he goes to the dentist to get his grill fixed, he can be told about how to brush his teeth and keep them in good condition?
Imagine the converse. What if we started offering circumcision to the women so that doctors can then “take the opportunity” to tell them about better hygiene practices and sex education? Would that be “gender equality?” Would this idea EVER fly? EVER??? Would there EVER be enough “research” and “science” to endorse female circumcision as a measure to prevent ANYTHING???
The million dollar question is, since when does a man need surgery to learn how to wash his dick and use a condom properly? Does not being circumcised somehow impede a man’s learning of these concepts? Does not being circumcised somehow nullify the protective effect of condoms?
How is it ANY sane person is actually BUYING INTO this crap???
Which brings me to another person; who are the people behind the big “push” to circumcise Africa? It is interesting that Bill Clinton and Katherine Haskins are being mentioned here. I see these names appear often whenever I see literature regarding HIV and circumcision, and I wonder who they are, what it is they do, and how is it they are ANYBODY to make ANY value judgement regarding male circumcision. The more I research, the more I find out that the people calling the shots all seem to have little to no authority.
Who is Bill Clinton? Hillary Clinton? Bill Gates? Brian Morris? Bono? Annie Lennox?
Since when did they become experts in HIV/AIDS transmission and circumcision? Do any of them have medical degrees? A degree in surgery? Urology? Pediatrics? Epidemiology? Some of these people are barely even connected to medicine. And yet the media somehow manages to present them as “experts.” Instead of asking somebody at the Royal Australian College of Physicians, who have reviewed all the “evidence” and found there not to be enough to recommend circumcision in Australia as an HIV prevention measure, why is it they go to Brian Morris or Alex Wodak?
I am outraged by what I have read about Haskins today. She’s an airheaded NOBODY to be talking about the AIDS epidemic, apparently all she cares about is feminism and mutilating men because this makes things “equal” for her. Really? HOW THE FUCK DID SHE GET IN THERE???
She and Clinton aren’t the first ones who are trying to wrap male circumcision as this “gender equality” issue. Using junk science, other experts are trying to say that since “circumcision prevents transmission of HPV to women,” then all men have to get circumcised. It’s only fair. Um, what about the research that says that it’s WOMEN who are giving MEN HPV? That circumcision actually FACILITATES HPV propagation? How would it sound if we started promoting female circumcision to prevent some disease in MEN??? Absolutely outrageous. I can’t find the words to express my disgust.
Another HIV/AIDS philanthropic that tries to use the same platform of “gender equality” to promote circumcision in Africa is Stephen Lewis. Apparently he’s also from Canada. Someone else from Canada that seems to parrot this is National Post owner Barbara Kay. You know what else these two pro-circ feminists have in common? They also happen to be JEWISH.
Pardon me for pointing out that the emperor is naked, but a lot of the circ for HIV prevention promulgators happen to also be Jewish. Neil Pollock (also Canadian) went to Rwanda on a baby cutting spree using HIV prevention as the pretext, paid for by Schusterman Foundation. Daniel Halperin, one of the bigger “researchers” heading the circumcision push in Africa is on record saying he’d like to continue his mohel grandfather’s legacy. Stephen Moses. Edgar Schoen.
The more I research this, the more something seems to become clear to me; a lot of the so-called “experts” on circumcision/HIV are really not worthy of that moniker. The more you dig, the more you find that a lot of the “experts” aren’t even credited in any medical field. Some are, but it’s so remotely distant that it’s irrelevant, Haskins is a case in point. Brian Morris improved the PAP-smear, big wow, but now he thinks he can write parenting books that focus on trying to convince parents to circumcise their kids, and to promote circumcision for HIV in Australia, Africa, and the rest of the world.
I think this has gone on long enough. It is high time we men start investigating who these people are, and exposing their incompetence and their conflicts of interest. The “research” has holes big enough to fly SS Enterprises through! How is it these “experts” are managing to get utter and complete BULLSHIT past the WHO? How is they are managing to force-feed this horseshit double think that “male circumcision” is “gender equality” to Africans and the rest of the world?
How many of you are familiar with circleaks.org? If you haven’t, then you should. Circleaks is a project being taken on by a small group of intactivists who would like to find and expose the truth of all these pro-circumcision quacks. We’ve got a lot so far, but there is only so much a handful of intactivists can do. We need more people who want at these disgusting fucks as much as we do. If you’re interested, I encourage you to please register and start contributing. If you don’t know wiki markup language, I encourage you to please sit down, learn some and help out. Circleaks is where we’re gathering all the evidence of ulterior motives, incompetence and fraud, and exposing it to the rest of the world.
If you’re computer savvy and would like to help bring these self-serving quacks to justice, please join us.
Robert,
The following blogs may be of interest to you.
HIV in Kenya is more broad and focuses on HIV in Kenya, as the namesake points out. However this author has touched on male circumcision on quite a few occasions. You may want to get in touch with him:
http://hivinkenya.blogspot.com/
Richard Rooney maintains Swazi Media Commentary. This blog is more general, and focuses on the current strife in Swaziland, but he too has touched on the campaign to circumcise the men there. Reading this blog, you realize that Swaziland has more problems than just a staggering HIV transmission rate, and you wonder why it is groups like PEPFAR have decided to zero in on just HIV/AIDS. He may also be someone worth getting in contact with.
http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/