Ignorance isn’t good, and in this case, it’s spreading.
A recent study on heterosexual anal intercourse suggests that couples feel that it is a safe way to avoid HIV and other STIs. The study was presented at the 2016 American Congress of Obstetricians & Gynocologists (ACOG) annual meeting by a team of physicians from the University of Washington in Seatle. One of the authors of the study, Dr. Lyndsey Benson, talked with Plus about the study, its results, and what it means.
The study, named Survey of Motivations for Anal Sex among Heterosexuals (SMASH), surveyed 5,000 American men and women aged 15-50 years old. The study began after a previous study by Benson highlighted “many knowledge gaps” in regards to what Americans knew about anal sex, including information about condom use, frequency of engaging in anal versus penis into vagina (PIV) sexual practices, and knowledge of HIV risks. Benson, the lead researcher, explained that this study was particularly important, as the majority (84 perccent) of new HIV cases in women can be “attributed to heterosexual contact.”
[…]
The researchers also discovered that a disconcerting number of Americans were engaging in hetero anal sex as a way to avoid sexually transmitted infections including HIV. More than 70 percent of adults in the study incorrectly believe that vaginal intercourse is higher risk than receptive anal intercourse. Among those that had anal sex, 10 percent reported they had done so as a form of contraception at least once.
The Advocate has the full story. This goes right back to Siobhan’s recent post about Canadian Blood Service’s new policies. Heterosexuals continue to be seen as low risk when it comes to blood donation, but gay men and transgender women are still being restricted and banned.
No matter how fucking stupid we behave…
Giliell:
Yes, and this is a real problem, on a few different levels. The ignorance is overwhelming bad, and I’m sure here in uStates we don’t have to look much farther than the Bush years of destroying any comprehensive sex ed. When it comes to blood donation, the double standards being employed are not only absurd, they are going to come home to roost in a bad way.
There is a small window of time where a person could have been infected with HIV and not picked up by the standard screening assay. That window is much shorter now than it used to be, perhaps only a few days in length. If protecting the blood supply was the only concern, ALL donors should be required to be abstinent from sex for that length of time prior to donation.
This is, in fact, the model employed in Italy. Some behavioural decisions are classified “risk” or “high risk” behaviours. The questionnaire no longer asks who you boink, but how. Unprotected sex is a “risk” behaviour which warrants a 4-month abstinence deferral, regardless of whom your boinkee was. The recent studies (you can find them on my post #shamelessplug) state that men, heterosexual or not, engage in equal quantities of “risk” behaviour.
Wow, Siobhan, you mean Italy has a policy that is in line with the known science? Like it was evidence based or something? I am shocked and appalled at their lack of bigotry and hysteria. I wonder how Italy’s infectious disease transmission rate per transfusion compare with the USA’s. It couldn’t be as good as or, horrors!, better than the US of A!? Shocked and appalled! [clutches pearls and looks about for nearest fainting couch]
Raucous Indignation:
While uStates blood services are also riddled with bigotry based reasoning, keep in mind that Shiv’s post is about Canadian Blood Services. This time, Canada has joined the States in idiocy.
Italy’s rate of HIV infection-via-transfusion rate is about 10x higher than Canada.
That the proportion of people with HIV is 10x higher in Italy seems to be unimportant by CBS’ logic.
How do data? What are logics?
This post went straight to the top, quickly. I can’t help wondering how many people reading this thought they were safe practicing anal sex.
Stares uncomprehending at story. And how did these people think HIV and other STIs were transmitted when AIDS was seen as a “gay disease”? Logic, how does it work?
Caine
I can’t even start to imagine. I mean, I just taught sex ed. I can’t say how much the kids internalised, but if they still don’t know they should always use condoms it’s not because I didn’t tell them repeatedly.
Giliell:
And here, some parent would have a heart attack over their precious hearing the word ‘condom’, throw a fit, and demand a form to excuse their darling from crucial information. It’s a clusterfuck here.
Well, over here I’m still waiting for the free condoms to arrive for “demonstration”.
Guess which way is much more effective at preventing both teen pregnancies and STIs….
The mildly deranged penguin points out one reason people think this is safe is the previously-inserted head(usually belonging to the same person whose arse the head is inserted into, albeit that’s not strictly required) prevents anything “nasty” from entering.
Like Inquisitiveraven @ 9, I was shocked at how hetero people can think that unprotected anal is okey dokey for them, but all kinds of bad for the gay guys. Even cognitive dissonance doesn’t answer for that one, so maybe it is head up the arse syndrome.