A new CBS report, citing an Emory University economist, says that penicillin - not the birth control pill - is what was really responsible for the “sexual revolution” of the 60s. I disagree with this for a few reasons - while it certainly removed one of the biggest-then-fears about unprotected sex - syphilis - for men, it certainly did nothing about the pregnancy concerns for women who did not use/could not access/whose partners did not allow condoms. It may have reduced certain fears, but for women who would be responsible for the child born even with the absence of syphilis, I have very real doubts that it did much to eradicate the anxiety as compared to the pill.
Circumcision to prevent HIV and STDs is a very contentious issue - but it is often greatly misunderstood and the arguments simplified. Check out my latest post on the The 2x2 Project and find out why context, consent, and risk are essential to the debate.