U.S. Sponsoring Forced Circumcision in Rwanda
Paid for and approved by George Bush’s PEPFAR (President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief)
The first stage of mass circumcision will be “regarded as an order” at least for the armed forces of Rwanda.
This policy of forcing men to be circumcised was apparently approved by the U.S. government, and was done in order to qualify for massive infusion of American funds, as opposed to the stated goal in domestic periodicals of making circumcision “available.â€? In reality, making circumcisions ““availableâ€? include forced mass male circumcisions.
The language given this past November from PEPFAR moved from “available� to “undertake.�
The New Times reported,
The Principal Deputy Coordinator of PEPFAR, Dr Thomas Kenyon, said via a video link from the U.S., that PEPFAR was prepared to provide funds to any country that is willing to undertake mass male circumcision, Dr Kenyon said.
Apparently, Rwanda’s plan, which is being implemented now with mass circumcision as an “order,” was approved beforehand by PEPFAR, since,
Dr Kenyon said that Rwanda has registered great success compared to the other PEPFAR’s 15 focus countries.
He said: “We highly appreciate the government of Rwanda for their effort in fight against HIV/Aids, we will continue working closely with all stakeholders in the fight against this pandemic.”
PEPFAR is basing its pro-circumcision stance on the WHO (World Health Organization). But it is Bush’s PEPFAR that is demanding mass circumcision “undertaking� as a requirement for funding.
In Rwanda, this amounts to 167 million dollars, a significant sum for country whose GDP was under 2 billion in 2005.
20 comments
In Rwanda, 3.8% of circumcised men have HIV, compared to 2.1% of intact men, so what the heck do they think they’re doing? That’s nearly twice as many. I’m not (of course) saying circumcision promotes HIV transmission (though it might) but clearly something else is going on. These figures are from the 2005 Demographic and Health Survey ( http://www.measuredhs.com/pubs.....pter15.pdf , p10 and p15).
This whole thing is not about fighting HIV. It’s about circumcised men trying to convince themselves they’re better off that way, and they’re prepared to sacrifice African lives to do it.
ABC everyone. Abstinence, Being faithful, Condoms.
This whole thing is not about fighting HIV. It’s about circumcised men trying to convince themselves they’re better off that way, and they’re prepared to sacrifice African lives to do it.
bullshit.
TM, then why isn’t Europe or Canada pushing circ for Africa? Why just the U.S.?
Rwanda is the partner-state of Rhineland-Palatinate, the German federal state I live in, and naturally, we get lots of news from there (that, and the college my father used to teach at has been supporting a school in Rwanda for years). The problem of HIV is a big one there (cf. http://www.who.int/globalatlas.....006_RW.pdf), but circumcision won’t fight it. It’s not about circumcised men trying to make themselves feel better about themselves (IMHO, an absurd claim per se), but about a theory some people in Africa have been promoting for a while that circumcision might prevent HIV infections, which is just as absurd. I might be a tad old-fashioned, but staying away from sleeping around and sticking with a trustworthy partner is a pretty safe means of preventing HIV. (BTW, a long-term study has shown that 70% of non-HIV positive partners in relationships with one partner being HIV positive eventually got infected despite the use of condoms. Things are more complicated than people try to make them out to be.)
DK, it’s easier and cheaper than effective development aid to one of the world’s poorest countries.
Kelsey, you mean other than because the circumcised cabal is pushing for it and clearly the cabal is largely here in the US after being, you know, murdered until virtual extinction in Europe and never having gained enough of a population base in Canada?
Oh sorry, that’s the idiotic conspiracy theory.
Why the US? Probably because circumcision is more prevalent here than in Europe. Maybe because the research has been driven from here. Maybe because Europe doesn’t see this as its fight. Maybe because Canada has other priorities and can’t afford to provide as much assistance as the US decided to provide on this issue.
I don’t know. I know that the premise that some group of circumcised men decided to do this to African men to convince themselves that they’re better off circumcised is moronic.
Though in my experience, circumcised men are more sanitary.
this must be aish hatorah or the hareidi community in israel’s fault
TM wrote,
“Maybe because the research has been driven from here.”
I think it has been.
“I know that the premise that some group of circumcised men decided to do this to African men to convince themselves that they’re better off circumcised is moronic.”
If you take into account the amount of money for hospitals and the U.S. medical industry at stake as well as potential lawsuits if circ really falls out of favor in the U.S…or rather, if it comes into intense disfavor, I think their are nefarious motives that are possible, and hardly unreasonable.
Sarah/froylein wrote,
“Though in my experience, circumcised men are more sanitary.”
I don’t even really know what that means exactly.
Will an explanation suffice, or do you require a demonstration?
If you take into account the amount of money for hospitals and the U.S. medical industry at stake as well as potential lawsuits if circ really falls out of favor in the U.S…or rather, if it comes into intense disfavor, I think their are nefarious motives that are possible, and hardly unreasonable.
Oh, more bullshit. Cut it out with the conspiracy bit already, it’s so ridiculous that it undermines the more valid arguments you make regarding circumcision. These ARE unreasonable claims. There isn’t a cabal, and there isn’t some organization of hospitals or rabbis or doctors that want to promote circumcision anywhere, much less in Africa. The research is also not out of character since we have more circumcisions here than they do in Europe.
I mean, really, if somebody felt the practice was under threat and wanted to defend circumcision, they wouldn’t do it by forcing Africans to get circumcised. In fact, that’s the last thing they would do.
I think Sarah may have just proposed an experiment, Kelsey. In the spirit of science, you should accept.
“Will an explanation suffice, or do you require a demonstration?”
Well…people from a female circumcising culture note similar things about women.
TM,
There are organizations that want to promote circumcision, just as there are organizations that want to discourage circumcision.
The reality is that it appears the U.S. is sponsoring FORCED circumcision in Rwanda through PEPFAR, and most remarkably, apparently approved the plan beforehand.
That alone is grounds for concern and suspicion that something is not kosher.
TM, I surrender to the power of golden lamé evil…
Well, maybe PEPFAR would have started in Texas if this was a conspiracy?
Oh wait, I got it! The neo-Cons, who are mostly circumcized, must have snuck in this new Bush strategery just after they made the non-Jews in the US go to war in Iraq.
“The neo-Cons, who are mostly circumcized”
Oh, puh-lease. Real Neocons are ALL circumcised.
BZZZZZZZTTTT!
Wrong.
We’ve discussed this before. Please don’t make me pull out those links that show all the uncircumcized neo-Cons who have/had even more power than the circumcized ones.
The ordering of Rwandan soldiers to undergo circumcision makes me feel better about my penis. Thank you oh mysterious interests for being so concerned about my fragile self-image. Forced circumcision of black men is awesome!
While the talk surrounding proposed campaigns such as this one spoke of making the services ‘available’ to consenting adult men, on a voluntary basis - the true colors come out in this news report.
This is consistent with the whole mentality behind circumcision. It is imposed on people ‘for their own good’. Usually by well meaning people, but these people cannot see outside of the construct of this primitive custom. Unlike almost anything else in medicine, the justification form circumcision has worked backwards. Any minor benefit that’s been discovered has been overstated, and taken out of context in order to try and prop up the legitimacy of the social custom. If there is a slightly less risk of a minor skin infection at some point in a males life that is more than good enough reason to perform surgery on a baby.
Through this distorted vision, when studies discovered that circumcision can reduce the risk of AIDS, once again context was thrown out the window. Now we must convince the African that they ought to be circumcised and be circumcising their children. What’s overlooked is that cutting of body parts is way more drastic than any of the other proven methods of preventing STDs. and much less effective. I have yet to hear anything in these policies that address the ethics of circumcising children. Lip service is payed to human rights and making the surgery available on a voluntary basis for fully consenting adult males. In practice however, the strategy is inherently paternalistic. Males must be convinced/coerced into submitting to the surgery, it is considered perfectly acceptable to pathologize natural male anatomy and introduce stigmas against intact males into a society and circumcising children is blindly accepted. It’s not about the stated objective of making circumcision available to those who want it. It is in fact about ‘Circumcising the Africans’
I suspect that this move by Rwanda is largely motivated by $$$. “it is Bush’s PEPFAR that is demanding mass circumcision “undertakingâ€? as a requirement for funding” “In Rwanda, this amounts to 167 million dollars, a significant sum for country whose GDP was under 2 billion in 2005.”
It’s a sad state of affairs if the world health community is propping up circumcision as a key strategy in fighting the pandemic. Last time I checked STD prevention was first and foremost an issue of education and behavior. The 3 studies behind this move were ended early, there have been flaws pointed out by scientists who have looked at these studies which may very well mean the efficacy of circumcision has been highly overstated. In order for these programs to truly be effective, males must use condoms and be educated about STD prevention and modify their behavior accordingly - thus rendering circumcision irrelevant. Another condition is that circumcision must be taken up en mass to have any effect at the population level - unfortunately you can’t force surgery on a population on a mass scale without infringing on people’s human rights and freedom of choice.
How voluntary is it if health programs introduced will label those who decline the surgery as a ‘health risk’.- which surely is an unspoken message of these campaigns. An uncircumcised man can be just as safe as a circumcised one providing he is aware of STDs and how to avoid them. But in Rwanda anyways part of his body must go now. This is wrong on so many levels.
Why not just make the services available to adult males?
Genitally mutilated men are famous for wanting other men to be genitally mutilated, too, especially their own sons. Circumcising is a sickness that communicates itself to the next mutilated generation. We do it to children when we become adults because adults did it to us when we were children. It’s called “child abuse”. That’s how child abuse works. Any excuse is good enough, or none at all, to “justify” succumbing to this sick, compulsive mental disorder that so often results from having been sexually tortured and mutilated as an infant or child.
Leave a Comment