I feel perturbed with organisations that promote condom use as an effective way to curb the spread of HIV.
For years, HIV prevention programmes have centred on the large-scale distribution of condoms.
These have been combined with safe sex propaganda aimed at convincing the public that putting a layer of latex between sexual partners can guarantee protection against HIV infection.
Several organisations use aggressive marketing campaigns, including T-shirts, to flood the media with pro-condom messages.
These safe sex media campaigns extol the protection condom usage guarantees.
But the talk is fast incorporating issues of immorality centered on condom usage which is giving our intelligent, productive professionals unwarranted and unwanted faith, and confidence that they can have sex with anyone, anytime, anywhere and still be assured of protection.
I find it weird and illogic for campaigners and clubs to train and coach the youth how to use a condom when they do not even know the difference between a boy and a girl.
Without dwelling on statistics about significant reduction in HIV/Aids transmission risk offered by consistent and correct use of condoms, it is palpable to state that the rate of HIV infection continues to grow at disquieting rates.
It is safe to state that condom use is far from being the perfect protection promised by the safe sex propaganda grossly funded by donors. From the tranquil paved by condoms, the road of promiscuity leads to death.
Furthermore, the presumed protection may lead to behaviour change that completely negates the protection.
For example, an individual who believes that consistent and correct use of condoms provides protection against HIV may engage in promiscuous behaviour that they would otherwise avoid.
In this way, the rates of HIV transmission may not be reduced at all by the safe sex messages but actually increase.
This could be the reason the rate of HIV/AIDS infection continues to grow despite the massive distribution of condoms.
One would deduce from the analysis of stipulated evasive actions by most organisations and clubs that curbing the spread of the pandemic may not necessarily be their first priority.
Besides, any effort to champion abstinence as the only reliable mitigation for not only the effects but also the risk of HIV transmission practically lacks support.
It is common logic that sex is part of life. Our actions depict what is in our minds.
It follows that HIV and Aids is mainly a moral, social and economic problem. This is to say that confidence and all the attributes stipulated above are products of computations in our minds which have a bearing on many other factors which include the environment in which we live.
In fact, we all have the capacity to control our sex life by simply renewing our minds and letting abstinence, which has proved to be the only effective way of curbing the spread of the pandemic, to be rooted in our minds.
A condom is more of an improvisation and not a solution.
Abstinence and sex within marriage are the only practical and primary solutions to the fight against Aids.
In the fight against HIV transmission, clubs and organisations must strive for optimal relationships based on love and trust instead of institutionalised mistrust which is what the condom is all about.
We need to prioritise abstinence in the fight against HIV transmission.