Pushing one angle, abstinence, to the detriment of all others is homicidal behaviour. Its like telling kids that they shouldn’t ride a bike till they are ‘ready’ (whatever that is), and not teaching them about road safety and helmets.

It’s not imperialism when you give people all the information. It is imperialism when you only push one (your) agenda.

I mention ideology, not because of you specifically saying it, but because the institutions who are making these demands are ideologically based.

To the discussion at large — I also think it’s worth pointing out that, whatever one thinks about abstinence-only programs, there’s a huge difference between saying to an American teenager, “Don’t have sex until you’re married” and saying to an African person of any gender, age, or sexual orientation, “Don’t have sex. Period.”

is worth reading. I haven’t had the time, but presumably

http://www.unaids.org/Epi2005/doc/EPIupdate2005_html_en/epi05_00_en.htm

is worth reading as well. Skimming one of the Africa sections:

Changes in sexual behaviour appear to have contributed to the declines in HIV prevalence. Condom use within casual partnerships has reached high levels (86% among men, and 83% among women) and data from recent national and local surveys indicate that there could have been a reduction in the reported number of sexual partners in recent years (Mahomva, 2004)

and this

What happened in Uganda?

Recent findings from a multi-year (1994—2003) study of 44 communities in Rakai in the south of country have helped refine understandings of the progression of Uganda’s epidemic. HIV prevalence declined sharply—among women from 20% in 1994-1995 to 13% in 2003, and among men from 15% to 9% over the same period. Generally in Uganda, such declines have been attributed to behavioural change. However, in Rakai, evidence of such change has been uneven, with researchers observing no significant increases in abstinence or fidelity. The proportion of teenagers who say they have had multiple non-marital partners has increased considerably (from under 25% in 2000, to almost 35% in 2003. Condom use with casual partners, however, is now more commonplace—especially for men—and has probably helped lower HIV prevalence (Wawer et al, 2005). However, most of the momentum for Rakai’s decline in prevalence appears to have derived from higher mortality rates—to such an extent that researchers’ calculations suggest that approximately 5% of the observed 6.2% decline in HIV prevalence in 1994—2003 in Rakai was due to increased mortality.

It is unclear whether or to what extent the trends observed in Rakai have played out elsewhere in Uganda. In Masaka district (next to Rakai), for example, declining HIV incidence in the 1990s appeared to correlate strongly to behaviour change (Mbulaiteye et al., 2002). However, in Rakai (and in other areas of the country) there are tentative signs of a possible resurgence of HIV incidence among young men and women (aged 15—24 years). These trends underline the need for revitalized HIV prevention strategies (Wawer et al., 2005).

Since discussions do best when there is real data to pore over, I thought these to be relevant.

The problem here is that we have people from one country trying to impose their ideologies on another country.
=====
I suspect that you would label abstinence as an ideology (even though I made no “moral” arguments about abstinence), and condom use as a strategy. But, aren’t you imposing your views on another country by telling the people to use condoms? You will say that condoms work and abstinence does not, but that does not change the fact that you are taking part in what some in the Academy like to call “cultural imperialism”.

Where the act of sex is seen as recreation to you, in some parts of the world it’s a commodity, it’s a weapon, and for some people it’s the only thing they can do to get a couple of cents to buy a handful of rice… Rape is rampant. Rape of men, women and even children…. If you’re a girl, you probably never lived with the VERY REAL threat of being raped BECAUSE you are a virgin and someone told a HIV+ guy (who you’ve never met) that you are his cure.
=====
Okay, you argue that this grim situation makes it unlikely that people are going to be convinced to stay abstinent. But according to your same argument, it would seem equally unlikely that such people are going to use condoms. Is the guy who thinks that having sex with a virgin would cure his HIV be convinced? What about those rapists? Will they put on a condom before raping? Instilling the importance of abstinence or the importance of condom use both require education — yet the difficulty in educating the continent is what you cite as an argument for condoms over abstinence. That, my friend, is not a logically consistent position.

Also, heterosexual sex has just as much risk associated with contracting HIV as homosexual sex. It’s almost 2006, people, stop living in the 80’s.
=====
As Mark might say, this idea is not “reason-based”. Consider this CDC report, which claims that only 35% of new HIV cases are due to heterosexual transmission. Since we are told that about 95% of the population are heterosexual, a bit of math would indicate that homosexual contact is far, far riskier. I am sure that an anatomist would tell you the same thing.

It’s not really a problem of us imposing solutions that work for us on a different culture where they won’t work. Rather it is just (a) a silly idea from the start and (b) more importantly, an approach that has been shown to fail.

The problem here is that we have people from one country trying to impose their ideologies on another country.

Charles said, “We can choose what we do and do not take part in — so long as we are educated about the X’s and the Y’s (see above). In short, while sex is an instinct, we are capable of controlling our instincts. I, for one, always appreciate the challenge.”

Now in the puritanically rooted US, with its first-world resources and ‘educated’ society, abstinence may work, and people can exercise their right to choose to do certain things.

But in Africa, it a totally different situation. Half the people having this argument have never seen the poverty and the way people actually survive in these countries first-hand. (Note: I use survive as opposed to live.) They haven’t seen the lengths that people go to in order to ensure their survival for the next 24 hours. Many don’t have the luxury of thinking more long term than that.

Where the act of sex is seen as recreation to you, in some parts of the world it’s a commodity, it’s a weapon, and for some people it’s the only thing they can do to get a couple of cents to buy a handful of rice.

Rape is rampant. Rape of men, women and even children. People who have the disease (HIV/AIDS) aren’t being properly educated, due to unrealistic programmes like the one being discussed here, and so are believing superstitious cures. And so it spreads.

It’s all well and good to say, “I think abstinence is a good way to not get AIDS.” But then again, you’ve probably never had to forage through trash to find something to eat, you probably weren’t born with the possibility of having HIV yourself then have to watch your parent(s) die from it when you were three. If you’re a girl, you probably never lived with the VERY REAL threat of being raped BECAUSE you are a virgin and someone told a HIV+ guy (who you’ve never met) that you are his cure.

So next time you see the sad face of that hungry child on TV, look in the background and take a reality check. That is the world you are trying to impose your white-bread beliefs on. To these people your life is akin to the royal families of Europe.

Condoms work. Uganda’s progress proves that. They may not address the whole problem, but they make a significant impact. And this impact is measured in lives.

Sure, tell people that abstinence will keep them safe. But we also need to arm them with the knowledge of what this disease is and how to minimise risk in all situations… and yes, that involves condoms.

Also, heterosexual sex has just as much risk associated with contracting HIV as homosexual sex. It’s almost 2006, people, stop living in the 80’s.

“Your moral ideals aren’t saving my life.”

First, nobody is disagreeing with the statement that if you don’t have sex you’ll dramatically reduce your chances of getting HIV. However, it is not the relevant question. The right question is whether telling people to practice abstinence works. It doesn’t. You just look at the input and the output and see if one gets the required effect. You don’t get to look at the ideal way you’d like it to work and declare the method a keeeper.

Secondly, without blushing again, Planned Parenthood is not a business and either you know it or you should blush that you don’t