Message-ID: <01BC4608.6BC226E0@ala-ca11-08.ix.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 23:09:36 -0700 From: "Ms. Aikya Param" <mailto:aikya@IX.NETCOM.COM> Subject: Re: Sex To: mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU
The trouble with the idea of condoms saving the world is that1) Men do not care to use them 2) This is still a patriarchal world in which men decide almost everything; 3) There is no sure way to force men to use condoms on the part of governments, or churches, temples or synagogues or international organizations.
Many problems from sexually transmitted diseases including AIDS and overpopulation would long ago have been solved with those little latex things, but men will not use them.
Alas, the long range and vague solution involving woman may be the key.
I would like the woman in your example to have learned how to read, to have adopted the idea of clean water and sanitation, to have learned about nutrition, to have made a commitment that her children should go to school and not to work. Is there any reason why condoms and education up to the 6th grade at least, clean water, sanitation, nutrition and schooling rather than child labor especially for girl children cannot coexist? Why only condoms?
Aikya Param Publisher Woman and Money 1405 Carleton St., A Berkeley, CA 94702 http://www2.netcom.com/~aikya/womenandmoney.html
---------- From: David Johnson[SMTP:mailto:pinefarm@UNIONTEL.NET] Sent: Thursday, April 10, 1997 7:50 AM To: mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU Subject: Sex
Conventional wisdom has it that the way to decrease the birhtrate in poor countries is to increase public health, decrease infant mortaliy and improve educational and employment opportunities for women. These are all good things and I support all of them, I just believe that it is a mistake to offer them as the best way to attack the problem. They are by their very nature long range and vague. That's not the case with condoms. They are immediate and a long ways from vague. They are cheap, easy to transport and distribute. What they do and how they do it is obvious to the most casual observer. They are easy to use and it is simple to verify whether they are being used or not. People say that men in macho cultures will not use them. Well, some will. PC, in my country of service, gave out condoms to Volunteers with no questions asked even though we were forbidden to promote their use. A coulpe I knew got a regular supply and gave them to a couple in the village. During the 2 years of their service, the woman they gave them to had no children. When they left, she immediately got pregnant with her 4th child. True, this is just one example but, surely their are others. The woman in question experienced none of the changes listed above. All she got was free condoms. I believe it is a mistake to assume that men are so bullheaded that they won't accept means to limit their responsibilities by limiting the number of children they have to support. This is stereotyping at its worst. It would be completely unacceptable if it was men stereotyping women. Even if it is true in most cases their are still a good number of couples who would take advantage of the opportunity to limit birhths. Just how many we won't know unless we try. If we wait for all the other things to fall into place, this will be a long time. Dave Johnson