How's that for a headline.
Reader Philip alerted us to this new study by Swedish researchers who found that a number of men felt that getting an sexually transmitted infection (STI) like chlamydia or HPV was perceived more as a medal of honor or right of passage than a health issue.
The University of Skövde researcher Kina Hammarlund, who is also a midwife, says she was (unsurprisingly) disappointed with the findings:
"Despite all the talk about gender equality, it seems like today's young people are wrestling with the same prejudices and stereotypical gender roles that existed when I was young in the 1970s."
While it's irritating that none of the factual evidence was disclosed (in terms of how many folks were studied, etc.), I still wanted to highlight it because it brings up interesting questions about men, sexual activity and contraception use compared to the stigma on women living with STIs as "damaged goods," etc.
Thoughts?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: STIs are so manly. .
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15660
Now that is quite surprising.
I have definitely never encountered that attitude in the United States. Have any of you encountered similar attitudes where you live?
I don't think I've seen anything that direct, but the attitude is similar and could logically lead to that thought - if a guy gets an STI then it shows that he's obviously banging strangers indiscriminately, as he should be, and there will be little negative said about it from the guy's male friends. Maybe not exactly a badge of pride, but definitely not a bad thing (as long as it's curable).
If anything it's a good story about some "nasty ho" or similar derogatorily named woman that he slept with for one reason or another, perhaps in a drunken stupor. The kind of story that gets an "aawww, man, you crazy motherfucker" not a "you should act more responsibly" and can be retold several times, depending on the remembered/invented details of the night. Everyone knows that kind of stereotypical man-story.
There was an old PSA called "Damaged Goods" that I saw through Rifftrax that was about this. Basically a bunch of guys go out drinking and picking up girls and then they end up with the clap. The doctor tut-tuts and the moral is, "You silly guys, you should know that you should only sleep with *clean* girls." It was disgusting.
I can't imagine that Swedish men are running out to get the clap to increase their manliness. I bet this is a little more about self-aggrandizement and trying to find the silver lining to a rather dark cloud... well shit, I've got this disease, but hey, it means I've scored lots of chicks, what ho!
Haha, yeah, it sounds pretty ridiculous to me too. That said, in a more general sense I think maybe it would be nice if STIs were viewed a little more mundanely, as health problems that just sort of happen and you go to the doctor and deal with it, as opposed to the ZOMG UNCLEAN! attitude that seems to prevail right now (I don't, however, want people to view it so casually that e.g. they don't bother telling their partners about it or something, of course).
That would be very nice.
I once dated a guy who insisted that I be tested before we had sex but refused to be tested himself (needless to say, I dumped him pretty quickly).
His excuse came in two parts: 1) he had only had one previous partner and he knew her entire sexual history (yeah right...) 2) a vagina is warm and wet and thus it's way easier for me to catch an STI. Furthermore, he said it was easier to treat men for STI's because "everything is out there". What?
So I guess I have to wonder if misinformation plays a part in studies such as this one. Yes, many STIs aren't too difficult to get rid of and are therefore only a temporary "badge" but I can't imagine that anyone living with HIV would feel this way. I would also like to know how the researchers phrased the question that prompted the "STIs are manly" response. Or is this just a general response given by the interviewees? I a little unconvinced.
Good job dumping that idiot. Even if he said he was a virgin he should have been willing to get tested if he insisted you did.
After rereading the article I have concluded that this is some bad science. I am still interested in knowing whether or not my anecdotal encounters with men who are misinformed about STIs are typical. And is misinformation more widespread in the US thanks to abstinence only sex ed? What sort of sex ed programs do they have in Sweden? I need answers... hopefully Google will give me some...
Sex Education in Sweden
Hoooo, boy. Well I think a couple of things are worth noting. First, the news article on the study doesn't give any numbers or percentages; it simply states that "many" men express this sentiment. it may be a very small number and almost certainly a small percentage. Second, the study interviewed only men age 16-30. I would bet the males expressing this sentiment were almost certainly no older than 20-21. Males in this age group aren't exactly known for their blinding intelligence in sex/health-related issues.
But actually, I think the more fascinating and/or disturbing finding of the study is why many sexual encounters do not include the use of a condom. The study said that females expressed fears she will upset a guy if she asks him to use a condom. Meanwhile, the guy doesn’t want to take out a condom first out of fear the action will show that he assumed he would be having sex even before the encounter began. So no one brings up using a condom!
Yea, I wish we'd get away from this bs. If you upset a guy by asking him to use a condom, probably best to find a different guy who won't be upset. And carrying a condom around does not necessarily mean one expects everything to lead to sex - perhaps simply that you're smart and prepared if anything ever happens.
Like the old saying goes. I'd rather have a condom and not need it, than need it and not have it.
I think what is interesting about this too is that it shows just how unhealthy hegemonic masculinity is, in that it encourages dangerous, risky behavior in your quest to be a "real man".
This is a single news article which doesn't cite numbers or any of the relevant statistical information, for a select populace (Swedish men who had contracted STDs, and who were willing to discuss it at length), which likely has substantial bias in the sampling. To draw a conclusion from that to the views of a majority of men seems unjustified.
We do know that based upon the researchers own statements that she had difficulty attracting men to participate, and the statements of the guys changed from a group setting to a private setting. Both issues call into question how any statistic which was generated could be accurate (whatever that statistic might be). It is extremely likely that most of the people who were unwilling to talk about this, did not opt out because they felt it was a badge of honor. Further, considering the change in the testimony we might not be witnessing a demonstration of true opinion but an attempt to spin things positively when in a group of people who had all been in the same situation.
It would seem to me like you are intentionally accepting gigantic leaps of logic which the evidence does not support. This merely gives the perception that you ceased to cast a critical eye on the study because it supported your predetermined conclusion.
"This is a single news article which doesn't cite numbers or any of the relevant statistical information, for a select populace (Swedish men who had contracted STDs, and who were willing to discuss it at length), which likely has substantial bias in the sampling. To draw a conclusion from that to the views of a majority of men seems unjustified."
Erm, "hegemonic masculinity" refers to the ways in which men are socialized, not what a majority of men believe. As for the rest, I don't really care to reply because I'm lazy.
For something to be hegemonic it needs to be predominant. To say that most men have been socialized in a particular way instead of to say that most men think in a particular way is a distinction without a difference in your statement.
You are impugning how most men are raised rather than most men. Yet if there was a difference between these to, it would not be "hegemonic" because it would suggest that the predominant influence was typically ignored, which hardly suggests power or influence. Substantial power or influence is a necessary condition for something to be hegemonic.
Great. Now guys can feel "manly" for having STIs, while women are shamed feeling liek "sluts" for having STIs.
There's just no fucking way we can catch a bloody break.
If it makes you feel better, it's completely messed up my life no matter how manly it's made me.
That doesn't feel like much of a break to me.
As a guy living in the US with a non-harmful but incurable STD, this is not the experience I have at all. It is embarassing, not something you talk about to friends (much less brag about), and when you disclose it to potential partners you find yourself alone.
I find the idea of it being portrayed as a "medal of honor" to men infuriating in the extreme.
Maybe its because they live in a country where healthcare is free to all people, sexual health services are readily available to young people without any sort of parental gatekeeper (financial or otherwise) and doctors are actually forced to treat people for sex-related matters instead of lecturing them on how they are dirty sluts who are going to hell.
So because they have good healthcare and comprehensive sex ed it makes sense that men would see STIs as a positive thing?
Sorry, can't get on board with that. I think that if any of this rings true (and several people have commented that this study seems suspect) it probably has more to do with misinformation than abundance of information.
I was mostly kidding. Of course no one likes to be sick, even with something much more minor than this, certainly not with dieases that can mostly be prevented through condom use. I was just jokingly calling attention to the fact that in other places the moral condemnation and shaming/financial and logistical hardship part of having an STD is lss acute, IMO, having spent considerable time in northern europe where my husband is from.
Noted. From what I've read about Swedish healthcare since yesterday it sounds fantastic.
My husband and I read this last night and were both equally horrified!
this article means nothing without data.
Whoever wrote this article left way too much out for me to take it seriously. The latter part of the article seemed somewhat reasonable, but I strongly suspect that the bit about young men feeling like STIs were a "badge of honour" is complete sensationalism. I'd be interested in comparing the data from the actual study to this article.
While I agree that this interesting that men feel more "manly" with an STI, what no one seems to be pointing out is that while the actually article that Vanessa linked to doesn't mention HPV at all, Vanessa uses it incorrectly.
You should know that there is no HPV test for men (see http://www.thehpvtest.com/About-HPV/FAQs-for-Men.html?LanguageCheck=1#Is-there-an-HPV-test-for-men), so there's no way that men can tell if they have HPV or not.
I’m going to vomit and you know these “men” probably only found out because the partner they cheated on got tested and the Swedish board of health had to contact them; the gift that keeps on giving and it causes infertility. Plus Sweden has about the highest rate of domestic violence out side the third world.