That headline appeared at one of those sites aimed at young women. You know the ones, twenty-five salacious articles about sex, twenty-three of which are designed to inspire young women to be more promiscuous and the remaining two are designed to scare them into thinking they will be raped, beaten or infected by their partner. This one fit into the latter category.
The new superbug is an antibiotic resistant form of gonorrhea that has sprung up. This is not a surprise, medical authorities have known for about a decade now that such a thing was inevitable given antibiotic abuse and other factors. And it is worth remembering that this disease will cause incredible suffering, particularly in the third world, by which I mean that the risk of, "ruining blowjobs forever" is perhaps a little trivial by comparison.
And it won't so much ruin blowjobs as it will ruin a rather odd kind of recreational sex in which young single women service young single men so that they can both get some kinds of thrills without much physical or emotional risk. With an incurable form of gonorrhea about to make the scene things won't ever be the same again.
And here, courtesy of the Center for Disease Control, is why:
Recreational sex with multiple partners hasn't turned out to be such a great idea has it? And it's not just disease. The emotional damage it has caused is just as real.
But, as I say, this has been inevitable for some time now. It's odd that it took the Center for Disease Control to suggest the one solution—" to be in a long-term, mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and is known to be uninfected"—that our cultural leaders have so desperately tried to pretend doesn't exist these last few decades.
The new superbug is an antibiotic resistant form of gonorrhea that has sprung up. This is not a surprise, medical authorities have known for about a decade now that such a thing was inevitable given antibiotic abuse and other factors. And it is worth remembering that this disease will cause incredible suffering, particularly in the third world, by which I mean that the risk of, "ruining blowjobs forever" is perhaps a little trivial by comparison.
And it won't so much ruin blowjobs as it will ruin a rather odd kind of recreational sex in which young single women service young single men so that they can both get some kinds of thrills without much physical or emotional risk. With an incurable form of gonorrhea about to make the scene things won't ever be the same again.
And here, courtesy of the Center for Disease Control, is why:
Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, can reduce the risk of getting or giving gonorrhea. The most certain way to avoid gonorrhea is to not have sex or to be in a long-term, mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and is known to be uninfected."Reducing the risk" sounds like a good deal when the worst you might have to face is a few weeks on antibiotics but how far do you need to reduce the risk before you feel comfortable with the thought of "incurable"? As it stands, I'd bet good money that most young women probably aren't currently insisting on condoms and this for a simple reason, they hate the things. In a sense it really will ruin things for them.
Recreational sex with multiple partners hasn't turned out to be such a great idea has it? And it's not just disease. The emotional damage it has caused is just as real.
But, as I say, this has been inevitable for some time now. It's odd that it took the Center for Disease Control to suggest the one solution—" to be in a long-term, mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and is known to be uninfected"—that our cultural leaders have so desperately tried to pretend doesn't exist these last few decades.
Herpes type 2 is incurable, didn't stop people from promoting having a case as a sign of sophistication and sexual freedom.
ReplyDeleteA LOT of young people (under 40) have herpes type 2, so I don't know that incurable gonorrhea will stem the tide of skankiness.
It's not quite the same if we compare symptoms. Herpes is painful and a serious hamper on the infected person's sex life but lots of people live with herpes quite successfully. Untreated, because untreatable gonorrhea on the other hand can cause serious and permanent health damage. It's going to take a while for this to sink in but this is going to be really bad news.
DeleteI agree, there is a big difference between Herpes and Gonorrhea for the reasons you cite. And I have heard young people joke about taking their anti-virals as a mark of sophistication. I could never understand how people could think that recreational sex with multiple partners would not have consequences, even when I was younger. What amazes me is the rapidity with which we began to see the physical or health consequences, not even a generation. Roughly 15 yrs after the so-called sexual revolution had begun, and 10 yrs after "gay liberation" AIDS had gained a foothold. STD rates have risen steadily to epidemic proportions among the 18 to 25 year olds. There are 500,000 new cases of Chlamydia diagnosed in the US every year. And as you correctly point out, that doesn't take into account the emotional damage that non-monogamous recreational sex has caused.
ReplyDelete