By SAM KNEW, MSW
Nearly 20 years ago the Reality © Female Condom (FC) gave way to a whole new response to the question of responsibility and empowerment regarding who wears the “pants” in a relationship. The FC is a loose-fitting, pre-lubricated, polyurethane pouch intended to fit into the vagina. The FC changed the rules of the game, giving women (initially) a better way of taking control of an intimate experience. Inevitably, much in the likes of the Lifetime channel, Designing Women and handbags (i.e. the murse) – the gays have followed suit; using the sexual barrier devise as a means for safe anal sex.
Although not yet approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for anal use, the female condom has been gaining more and more popularity among gay men, as well as anyone one who engages in anal sex. The fact that the device is made of polyurethane means it will adjust to body temperature, so both you and your partner can feel each other’s body heat. Another added advantage is that the recipient (bottom) can place the device in place hours before hand and not have to interrupt foreplay placing in the devise or negotiating safe sex practices with their partner – allowing the recipients to take control of the situation and their own health.
However, there are some critics to this device. First and foremost, there has been little research done on whether or not the FC is an effective means to prevent the spread of Sexual Transmitted Infections (STI) when used anally. The International Rectal Microbicide Advocates (IRMA) is one of organization that had conducted initial studies. It summarized a study done on 100 men who have sex with men using the female condom. It reported:
Generally what most participants liked about Reality (FC) were its heightened sensitivity and spontaneity, while insertion difficulties and high cost were the factors least liked. Acceptability was higher among men who were HIV-positive, in nonmonogamous relationships, or who had serodiscordant sex partners. Negative experiences included difficulty inserting (33%), irritation (17%), bunching up (12%), unpleasant texture (10%), and noise (9%). Breakage was reported 3 times in 334 episodes of use.
It should also be noted that the lack of scientific research has not prevented many healthy counselors and State Health Departments from encouraging its use for anal sex, to prevent the spread of STIs.
As one health advocate put it in a recent issue of the Washington City, “Even though we do know it can be effective, that’s not something that we can really state yet.” In addition, the DC Department of Health has placed instructions of how to use the devise anally online. The instructions include a popular practice of removing the inner ring that the device comes with (which is optional, and widely recommended for anal use).
The FC shares many of the same risks of traditional condoms, including breakage and skin irritation. One unique disadvantage to the FC includes the possible noise when using the devise; lubricant is suggested to reduce any sounds. A unique advantage of the devise is the comfort and pleasure it provides men who are uncircumcised or have a non-traditional shaped penis in terms of size and shape. The FC is less constricting, does not force the foreskin back over the head of the penis and does not have to fit the penis itself.
Needless to say more studies are needed. One representative for the Female Health Company, the producers of the FC, adds it may be years until we see the FDA approve a Class III, insertable condom for anal sex. Thankfully, you don’t have to wait; female condoms are available in most convenient stores and adult stores. The only thing you have to do is take control and use it.