I was reading a post on antimisandry.com today about Women's Institute women who are fighting to legalize prostitution in order to improve conditions for prostitutes. The women are visting brothels in various countries to find what they consider an example of ideal working conditions or the "perfect brothel". One of the women made the following comment,

'I discovered that in brothels in Holland men must wear condoms, which makes sense, and girls are regularly tested for infection. This is very important, not just for the girl, but for the family of the man who has been to see her.'

Did you catch that? It's essential for a man to wear a condom to protect the girls, as well as to protect his family should he catch some terrible sexually transmitted disease. Of course, there's no concern for the man who'll potentially contract HIV and end up be dying of AIDS.

I see this concept repeated time and again, and not just by the rad-fems, either. It seems I can hardly read anything that talks about the welfare of men without seeing the real concern being for the women in their lives.

If a soldier dies in combat, it's his wife and mother who are the real victims. If the suicide rate for men is alarmingly high, we must combat it because of the devastating impact it will have upon their wives and mothers. If men are dying at younger and younger ages, the real issue is the wives who they'll no longer be able to support.

Men are actual real, live human beings and as such, they matter. They don't merely matter as an extension of someone else. Their lives are not only important as they relate to the women in them. The very worst part about a soldier dying is the tragic loss of a young life that's ended way too quickly. The worst thing about high male suicide rates is the large number of men suffering emotional and mental anguish and the subsequent needless, wasteful end of their lives. The worst thing about men dying IS MEN DYING.

I don't imply that wives and mothers are not affected by the death of their sons and husbands. I can't imagine anything more devastating than if my husband or one of my children were to die, but the greatest tragedy would not be mine. The greatest tragedy would be the life that was ended prematurely.

Personally, I'm tired of the lives of men only mattering as they affect women. I'm tired of concern only being shown for the issues of men if those issues are negatively impacting women and I'm tired of hearing that we must take interest in the welfare of men for the benefit of women. It's a disgusting disregard for the value of life and it's a despicable display of bias. Society obviously accepts the importance of lives.....just not the lives of men.

More...

Preach it, sister! Tell it how it is and show women that we need everybody, men and women, to care about one another.

You mean we men actually matter to somebody? Thanks, Kim, another great job!

I totally agree with grizzly penguin.

But I have been thinking about this lately.

So much is expected of men. And I do it myself and a lot of other women do too. (Yeah, I asked)

It is also a discussion that comes up on radios.

"Men can't have equality because women won't let them", says the men.

And it is true. Women don't want men to be human beings. The want them to be heroes. They expect them to take everything dished out to them. (please excuse generalisation)

But then they cry when the man can't take it. There is always a breaking point. And if he takes some much, the boundary is pushed to expect him to take just a bit more and then a bit more.

And then he becomes a broken man. And boy, are there many of them around at the moment.

If a married (or unmarried) guy visiting a prostitute uses a condom, it's OBVIOUS he is doing so to protect himself. He probably doesn't really give a damn about the wife and kids at home or he wouldn't be out sleeping with prostitutes in the first place.

Do we really need to write an article to men on the dangers of sleeping with prostitutes? Or are these men capable of figuring out the dangers for themselves? If they don't wear condoms, who's fault is it?

The whole subject irritates me. If men are putting themselves at risk for STD's, AIDS, divorce, etc by sleeping with whores, that's on them. It's preventable.

And before anyone accuses me of not caring about men or men's health, nothing could be further from the truth. But I'm going to be honest when I say this: if a guy contracts an STD while having unprotected sex with a whore, and then passes this infection to a wife or someone else, I'm going to feel more sorry for the person they passed this on to.

Not exactly what my post was about, BUT.....I think you're making assumptions concerning the families of the men. These could be young, single men who's mothers would be devastated by them contracting AIDS or divorced fathers with children. I would never advocate "sleeping with whores", but if we're going to be concerned about the health and welfare of the prostitutes, then why shouldn't equal concern be extended to the men who frequent them?

However, as I mentioned, not really the point. The point is, and I can present an endless supply of examples, generally when we see the welfare of men being championed, it's because of the effect their demise will have upon the women in their lives. This pertains far beyond cases of married men visiting brothels.

Good point Tera.

Good point Kim.

Lol, you ladies are fun to follow.

Yes, there should be equal concern about men's health, and I think that if it does take a massive campaign to teach men and boys about the dangers of frequenting prostitutes, so be it. Maybe it's assuming too much to think that men and boys know the risks, or that knowing the risks would deter them.

I also think it's important to emphasize that condoms are not 100% effective in preventing STD's or pregnancy, and, though some (few) of the prostitutes may be being tested for HIV, it can take up to six months for the infection (HIV antibodies) to show up in tests. During that window of time, the infection can be passed to someone else without the person having it knowing they are passing it on.

I have to wonder, in brothels where women are tested, are the risks explained to the male patrons before they engage in sexual activity? Are they forced to sign a legal document saying that they understand the risks? Must they sign away any right to sue the brothel (or prostitute) for contracting an STD?

To be honest Tera I am surprised that this is on the table. I thought this was all sorted years ago.

Women are tested because parlours are offering a service for money. Men are the clients so men are important.

If a woman is found to have a disease she cannot work. Should she sue??? I dislike America. Sorry, but America is far from deserving world support.

Ha...you make a good point. She probably could sue...and successfully get disability payments at the same time. Of course it's utterly ridiculous. But that's America.