Professional Documents
Culture Documents
and something the author calls pseudo-responsibility. People, he says, who promote condom usage
advertise condoms as reducing the risk of transmitting HIV. This, according to the author, misleads
ordinarily people to think that all sex is safe, and therefore it increases their sexual behavior.
The implication of the authors arguments is that to reduce the spread of AIDS and avoid a
future catastrophe having the same devastating effects as the black plague in Europe on the
th
14 century, promotion of condom use must be stopped.
CONTRASTING OPINIONS
Zimmerman has a very moralistic view on sexuality that is not compatible with the publics
view. The trend today is that young people start having sex earlier than before. Also, there are few
people who wait to have sex until they are married. This trend was illustrated by the controversial
movie, "Kids," made by a sixteen-year-old American boy, which has been highly debated by health
workers.
The view on condoms in the sphere of public health is that they are our best means of
reducing the spread of sexual transmitted infections like HIV. In one study that looked at the
transmission rate among heterosexual partners with one partner infected by HIV, among the 123
couples that consistently used condoms, none of the partners became infected, whereas 12 of the
122 who didnt consistently use condoms became infected.
For optimum effect in using a condom, correct use and storage is a necessity. Therefore,
health workers travel around to schools to teach adolescents to use condoms correctly. This method
belongs to the principles of harm reduction, which says: "You should not use, but if you doD." Several
studies have confirmed that up to the present time, this is the most effective method for preventing the
spread of STDs. Some people go as far as to say that condoms should be made as common as
toothpaste and toilet paper, in order to protect us against infections.
Evaluation
This section contains an evaluation of the article. Firstly, the authors arguments appear to be
biased towards his Christian beliefs. He is a Catholic priest and has a very moralistic view of sex. In
his opinion, sex before marriage is immoral. A minority in the American population would support this
kind of view. His views on sexuality are, in short, not consistent with current views within the
population. Furthermore, he shows prejudice against homosexuals and Africans. He holds these two
groups as the source of the HIV virus. The fact that the virus is more prevalent in these two groups
does not mean that they are the source of the spread. In his article he says that "the ghetto of
sodomites is going into extinction, and that could lead to the extinction of AIDS." This is an extremely
prejudiced statement, and it has parallels to Hitlers statements about Jews: if we eliminate all the
homosexuals, we can get rid of AIDS.
Another negative point about this article is that it is very argumentative with little support. The
author throws out statements, giving no evidence or supporting details for them. This is bad writing,
and the author loses his creditability.
Finally, he misinterprets information from other data and gives the wrong information or only
parts of the truth. The data from the analysis done for the WHO indicate that condoms significantly
decrease the risk of transmitting HIV. However, Zimmerman overlooks this, and instead interprets it to
show that condoms increase the spread of HIV. Furthermore, he refers to the endemic situation in
Uganda, and claims that this is the situation we are going to experience in the future if the promotion
of condoms continues. What he fails to mention is that the situation in Uganda could have been
avoided with the promotion of condoms. The number one cause of the spread of HIV is unprotected
sex, and with the correct use of condoms, the spread can effectively be reduced.
Conclusion
This critical review has evaluated the article "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS" by
Anthony Zimmerman. The arguments in the article show the presence of bias, prejudice,
argumentative writing without supporting details, and misinformation. These points weaken the
authors arguments and reduce his credibility.