Monday, October 15, 2012

Breaking News: HPV Vaccine Isn’t Slut Sauce!


Let’s jump right on in, shall we?

I just saw a story on the Good Morning America news crawl about how a new study has found that the HPV vaccine doesn’t make girls promiscuous.

Pause…sip coffee…continue.

Lawd, there is so much in there that makes my Afro hurt that I don’t know where to begin.

First off, I’ve grown to hate the word “promiscuous” because it is usually connected with Evangelical bullshit that having an active sex life outside of man-on-woman sanctified marriage is a bad thing.  “Promiscuous” is code that makes it clear that sex in abundance can’t be good and I happen to think that’s bullshit.

Having said that…no shit followed by a loud ass “DUH!” regarding the HPV vaccine not turn young women into anything other than young women protected from HPV.

Are we really so damned puritanical that folk actually found comfort from the threat of CANCER potentially inhibiting young women’s sexual behavior?

That’s just sick.

Damn.

We’re one step away from the “orgasms are of the devil!” stage of the puritan revival.

Blink.

7 comments:

Rileysdtr said...

One (yes, only one this time) question. How often do we hear boys described as sexually promiscuous? I can think of... never. You?

Anonymous said...

Well, guess they were tired
of debating women's bodies -
they've turned to little
girls!

There had better be a lot
of folks voting or we might
as well see if the Amish communities are accepting converts. At least they
are out in the open with
all their prohibitions!
(I live in Ohio; thus the
Amish reference.)

Mira said...

I always want to ask the people who think the HPV vaccine will make girls promiscuous if getting their tetanus booster made them go out and stick rusty nails in their eyes.

Anonymous said...

To say that the HPV vaccine will make girls more promiscuous is fallacious, and illogical. That being said, one might benefit from studying this vaccine, and vaccines in general. Their efficacy is entirely questionable and the potential for harm (reactions, auto-immune disease, brain damage) is great - not to mention giving young girls/boys a false sense of security that they have 100% coverage that will prevent HPV (NOT). Pair all this up with the government stripping our right to choose whether or not we want the vaccine, or taking away a parent's right to decline the vaccine for their minor children and you have a real recipe for bad medicine. Sometimes it's about more than our perception of a 'quick fix'.

Pamela Merritt said...

Anon...
Interesting points. I'll say that I've witnessed the information given out to parents re: HPV and its got more detail about what it will and won't do than I was given prior to major surgery. Having said that, I'm too old to qualify and old enough to have lost more than one amazing person to cervical cancer - this is about information and prevention (not 100%).

I'd take those odds any day.

But then again, our current nation would have NEVER taken the risks that folk took in the 50's re: Polio. We're not the same type of people anymore, so maybe we deserve a different outcome.

Anonymous said...

As for me, I'll preach routine screening for sexually active women and the use of condoms, promote monogamy and abstinence before monogamy, and avoid toxins in my body that offer questionable prevention, and verifiable risk. Regardless of how anyone likes to spin it, having multiple sex partners who have had multiple sex partners is risky behavior. When did self-control and well considered behavior become a bad thing?

Pamela Merritt said...

Anony,

I know 3 women who didn't have sex until they were married and contracted HPV...2 from partners who didn't disclose having had sex because they were so damned shamed of having done it.

Risk isn't a one way street.