Join 3,572 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


They Wrapped a Sock Around Their C---
September 13, 2005 9:39 AM   Subscribe

Bush's War on Condoms "... the Bush administration's policy of emphasizing abstinence-only prevention programs and cutting federal funding for condoms have contributed to an alleged condom shortage in Uganda." Meanwhile, people desperate to prevent HIV infection have begun using garbage bags as condom substitutes.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy (49 comments total)

 
Well, it's working out rather well for them, isn't it.
posted by cytherea at 9:49 AM on September 13, 2005


What a tragedy.
posted by NewBornHippy at 9:50 AM on September 13, 2005


There's one example (out of so many) that illustrate so well why the US has lost the moral authority it once wielded.
posted by clevershark at 9:53 AM on September 13, 2005


Are they brown in Uganda?
posted by NationalKato at 9:55 AM on September 13, 2005


Maybe we can send them all our plastic shopping bags and kill two birds with one stone?

Is this more of the Bush administration's religiously based initiatives?

Abstinence-only as an HIV/AIDS prevention policy is ridiculous. Just don't fuck is their message? I'd like to institute an abstinence-only policy for George Bush, just don't fuck with things anymore.
posted by fenriq at 9:55 AM on September 13, 2005


See also: "Boston - Abstinence and fidelity - cornerstones of the Bush administration's overseas AIDS prevention programs -- may be playing less of a role than previously thought in driving down HIV infection rates in Uganda, where the idea first gained credence, according to new findings presented here Wednesday."

Furthermore, right-wing Senator Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican, demanded that the United States stop financing a Central American HIV-AIDS prevention programme because condoms were being handed out to prostitues.

So condoms are a) legal and b) very effective but the Bush administration and the Republican party want to prevent people in other countries from using them.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:00 AM on September 13, 2005


fenriq writes "Just don't fuck is their message? "

If George Sr. and Barbara had been given that message and had abided by it, think how much better off the world would be today.
posted by clevershark at 10:00 AM on September 13, 2005


clevershark, damn GHWB and his disastrous humping! Damn him straight to hell!
posted by fenriq at 10:11 AM on September 13, 2005


This is fucking stupid.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 10:12 AM on September 13, 2005


So wait... you're saying that garbage bags don't work as contraception?

uh-oh
posted by reklaw at 10:15 AM on September 13, 2005


This is so disturbing; Somewhat reminiscent of the war on drugs. What exactly are we trying to accomplish? BushCo owns a pharm company somewhere with a cure, they're just waiting for economies of scale to make it more profitable?
posted by AllesKlar at 10:20 AM on September 13, 2005


What a disgusting spectacle. This is about ideology, and pandering to ignorance and dogma, all at the expense of Ugandan lives. It's politically expedient. Satisfy your idiot fundamentalist base with this nonsense, and the only people who lose are half the world away and mired in poverty. Everyone wins.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 10:51 AM on September 13, 2005


Garbage bags for condoms? Wow, they must have huge dicks...
posted by jefbla at 10:52 AM on September 13, 2005


What exactly are we trying to accomplish?

One of the sacred precepts of the religious right (and hence the Bush administration) is that society is corrupt and immoral and the way to remake society is to teach the youth of the world that abstinance is the only way to prevent unwanted pregnancies and STDs.

Thus they are fighting immorality with the cultural standards and biological drive they wish existed, rather than the cultural standards and biological drive that actually exist.

This hasn't actually worked for them in Texas, but hell, no need to give up just yet. Why not try this little social experiment overseas?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 10:57 AM on September 13, 2005


The last condom America needs for GW Bush.
That ought ought to keep the f*ckwad from screwing up the country so badly for the next three years.
posted by nofundy at 10:57 AM on September 13, 2005


Hmmm.. appears I messed up the link above. Sorry.
It was a full body condom costume image.
posted by nofundy at 11:00 AM on September 13, 2005




Why do you hold America responsible for supplying the rest of the world with condoms?

Doesn't the magnificent and highly evolved Europe have any condoms to spare? Or Japan?
posted by StarForce5 at 11:51 AM on September 13, 2005


Duh, it's about cutting funds if condoms are promoted, not about handing out condoms. But I guess that was pretty clear to you...

I found this abstinence policy sad and ridiculous enough when I thought it only applied to the US. But this is outrageous... and par for the course. Is there a better way to say "accept our bigotry or die"?
posted by uncle harold at 12:07 PM on September 13, 2005


The concept that America is morally or legally responsible to supply the rest of the world with condoms is ludicrous. What is also ludicrous is the idea of using garbage bags as condoms. So to set up a syllogism (see above) as a device to blame the Bush administration for their admittedly short-sighted justifications for not supplying condoms for the idiocies of residents of third-world countries seems rather equally idiotic, doesn't it?
posted by gagglezoomer at 12:08 PM on September 13, 2005


Clarification: My comment makes no sense.
posted by gagglezoomer at 12:09 PM on September 13, 2005


The concept that America is morally or legally responsible to supply the rest of the world with condoms is ludicrous.

Not really. Condoms are cheap when bought in bulk, and the United States has plenty of money (or we did until recently). A condom that costs less than a penny can save a life; if you don't give a shit about other people, then look at it this way: economically speaking, a condom that costs less than a penny can prevent us from having to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on drugs to treat HIV.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 12:15 PM on September 13, 2005


gagglezoomer writes "Clarification: My comment makes no sense."

Agreed.
posted by clevershark at 12:16 PM on September 13, 2005


Perhaps his condom ignorance played a part in New Orleans - to prevent dangerous spills, you need to keep a little reservoir at the tip.....
posted by CynicalKnight at 12:16 PM on September 13, 2005


Q: How can you tell if elephants are having sex in your yard?

A: The trash can liners are missing.
posted by fixedgear at 12:33 PM on September 13, 2005


Madness.
posted by Smedleyman at 12:47 PM on September 13, 2005


Bush's War on Condoms "..

well, he's losing -- and losing bad -- against Osama and the Iraqis. at least he managed to win against a bunch of rubber sheaths
posted by matteo at 1:02 PM on September 13, 2005


Duh, it's about cutting funds if condoms are promoted, not about handing out condoms. But I guess that was pretty clear to you...

...so according to you America is obligated to give the rest of the world free condoms AND money as well. What a sweet deal. You sure are generous.
posted by StarForce5 at 1:37 PM on September 13, 2005


...so according to you America is obligated to give the rest of the world free condoms

We already have a full quota of idiots, thanks. Try MonkeyFilter, it's free.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 1:50 PM on September 13, 2005


We already have a full quota of idiots, thanks. Try MonkeyFilter, it's free.

Try getting a clue and understanding the topic before commenting.
posted by StarForce5 at 2:00 PM on September 13, 2005


starforce5, you might want to heed your own advice.

The USA had no problem giving money to these groups before, but the second those groups start using that money to buy condoms they get cut off.

If you cant see that is screwed up, then I think you have the problem.
posted by Iax at 2:09 PM on September 13, 2005


Iax and Armitage Shanks, don't engage the troll!

Because we all know how morally repugnant it is to help poorer countries than ours. I mean, how DARE THEY expect the average American citizen (StarForce5, for example) to contribute to their ridiculous, unworthy cause, let alone give a fuck about the less-fortunate?

THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS GREAT COUNTRY IS ABOUT.
posted by nonmerci at 2:22 PM on September 13, 2005


Yeah, let 'em all die of AIDS. That'll teach them for not being born in a rich country!
posted by clevershark at 2:33 PM on September 13, 2005


From a purely contractarian point of view American's have no direct social contract with the people of Uganda therefore owe them neither money nor condoms. From a utilitarian point of view American's are better off spending their own tax money on their own health care needs. So what then forms the basis of your assertion that America exclusively owes health care to the rest of the world? Why not Europe? Why not the UN? You can address this or continue to flame and fume like children do.
posted by StarForce5 at 2:40 PM on September 13, 2005


Iax and Armitage Shanks, don't engage the troll!

I don't think he's a troll, I think he's an idiot. It's an important distinction.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 2:49 PM on September 13, 2005


From a purely contractarian point of view
From a utilitarian point of view

From a worthless asshole point of view, a similar argument holds. Coincidentally enough.

When my taxes are no longer being wasted on killing poor people and greasing cronies' palms with contracts, THEN we can talk about whether this paltry aid is our responsibility or not.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:51 PM on September 13, 2005


Sorry, our condoms are in use.
posted by 999 at 2:55 PM on September 13, 2005


From a utilitarian point of view American's are better off spending their own tax money on their own health care needs.

Sure. It's none of our business to try and help them. It's not like it's communicable, since we're y'know, all utilitarians here.
*coughgreatesthappinessforthegreatestnumbercough*

I see no reason to deny anyone reproductive choice exept for (stupid) religious reasons or to increase the tax base by keeping the population high (elitist).

+ what sonofsamiam said.
posted by Smedleyman at 3:36 PM on September 13, 2005


So, what exactly did Bush use during his cocaine, drunken frat-boy romps in the sack while in college? He's so goddamn hypocritical.
posted by aacheson at 3:53 PM on September 13, 2005


Actually "utilitarians" take a fairly global point of view, generally prefering to spend huge amounts of western dollars on efficient methods to treat third world problems. For example, a utilitarian might try to argue that the west should give no money to provide AIDS drugs in third world countries because you save so many more lives by spending the money on condoms instead. Utilitarian means caring about the sufffering of others, but in the most effective way possible.
posted by jeffburdges at 4:15 PM on September 13, 2005 [1 favorite]


So what then forms the basis of your assertion that America exclusively owes health care to the rest of the world? Why not Europe? Why not the UN? You can address this...
This of course is bullshit, no one has asserted that this should solely be the province of the US, and the EU or UN don't have a role. But I'll take this one on. Here you go, the US is the stingiest wealthy country. This is a well-known fact except in certian circles in the USA.
posted by wilful at 5:00 PM on September 13, 2005


certian certain.

Oh, and your grasp of the utilitarian argument is rather weak. I would imagine that a utilitarian would argue for carpet bombing those countries in condoms.
posted by wilful at 5:02 PM on September 13, 2005


George Bush doesn't care about black people.
posted by SirOmega at 5:11 PM on September 13, 2005


While I would like to see what other countries are doing to help the condom situation in Africa, I don't think that saying "Well, um, what about FRANCE?" takes the US off the hook. This "global gag rule" that Clinton took off the books and Bush re-enstated is disgusting.

I wish I could say that it gives me some hope that people are clever enough to figure out that they should have safer sex somehow, but the idea of garbage bags just makes me shudder. Such a sad sad state of affairs.
posted by grapefruitmoon at 5:24 PM on September 13, 2005


so... do we send our trash bags to the red cross or unicef?
posted by obeygiant at 5:43 PM on September 13, 2005


From a purely contractarian point of view American's have

From a utilitarian point of view American's are

Hey check this out, bro: from a strictly utilitarian point of view STOP FUCKING DOING THAT

After you're done with that, re-read the comments of Smedleyman and jeffburdges. You just might learn a little something.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 9:13 PM on September 13, 2005


what 'moral authority' would that be?
posted by TrinityB5 at 10:02 PM on September 13, 2005


I'm surprised by all the surprise. This is not a new component of U.S. foreign policy.

That conservatives are trying to stamp out harm reduction abroad is no small story, but both pages missed the fact that this is only the latest installment in a long story of strings-attached giving that has been changing U.S. foreign aid policy for years. From AIDS prevention measures stigmatizing sex, to anti-human trafficking targeting prostitution, to drug policies purged of pragmatism, foreign aid has become an American adventure in social engineering.
posted by dreamsign at 5:52 AM on September 14, 2005


You know, I'm pretty sick of people saying things that are both dumb and factually incorrect, then not bothering to defend these dumb things.

Hurr utilitarianism I'm a 15 year-old debate team member
posted by Optimus Chyme at 6:48 AM on September 14, 2005


I spent the summer in Tanzania, Uganda's neighbor. I think that perhaps the thing that is missing from the discussion is that when GWB decided to fight AIDS he allocated a bunch of money to AIDS work. In Uganda, HIV was declining, Tanzania looked to Uganda to see how it worked. HIV is on the increase in Tanzania, despite the millions/billions that the US is giving to 'fight AIDS'. As a result, many kids on the streets have t-shirts that say 'ishi' which means 'live', paid for out of the US AIDS budget. I saw a huge banner that said, 'love many choose one'. I found that message confusing but apparently it was advocating abstinence. Doctors from Harvard were spending summers not talking about condom use, in a culture much like our own, where many many people have sex with multiple partners. This was because their money was 'Bush money'. They could talk about abstinence, and they could treat AIDS, but they couldn't advocate condom use.

Europe funds a lot of condom programs in Tanzania - the government is quite amenable towards it. Its just that the message being given is now all jumbled, so people use condoms until they get in a quasi-relationship and then they stop. The message that we all got loud and clear, 'do what you want but use a condom' has become 'love many, but choose one', and 'live'.
posted by goneill at 6:51 AM on September 14, 2005


« Older David Brooks makes an interesting point....   |   The Emperor's Bunker.... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments