Not a member? Sign up now
February 19, 2007
| REGULARS |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
No one knows where condoms got their name — theories include bawdy King Charles II's Irish physician Dr. Condon, or the town of Condom in Southern France — but they've been around long enough to accumulate a storied history. Gabrielle Fallopius first mentioned using linen sheaths as protection against VD in sixteenth-century Italy, and they quickly became popular with aristocratic libertines who wanted to avoid the fun of having their noses rot off from syphilis. (Showing that men have been ever mindful of their partners' pleasure, early models were tied on with a pretty ribbon.)
The only problem with the beta version of the prophylactic was that it was out of most people's price range. Thankfully, Charles Goodyear's discovery of the vulcanization process fixed that, and by the 1850s, rubbers were cheaply mass-produced. This, however, only replaced one promotion problem with another: using these early préservatifs was like fucking though a tire, and even worse, you had to wash it out and re-use it when you were done. But by 1912, Julius Fromm had invented the modern disposable prophylactic by dipping molds into the rubber solution; he quickly took over the market. Today, thanks to the advent of AIDS and the resulting safer-sex campaigns, condoms have replaced birth-control pill dispensers as the standard nightstand accessory. Yet the Coney Island whitefish was an endangered species in the United States from the late 1800s until the 1920s. The reason why is a fascinating and instructive bit of cultural history. It was in 1873 that "Secretary and Special Agent for the Society for the Suppression of Vice and Post Office Inspector" Anthony Comstock, a Civil War veteran and former dry-goods clerk, succeeded in persuading Congress to pass the so-called "Comstock laws." These laws forbade the trafficking of any material judged obscene — including any sort of advertising for, or public discussion of, "devices or techniques meant to provide protection against conception or venereal disease." Comstock was backed by the New York City-based Young Men's Christian Association, an evangelical organization founded by businessmen for the spiritual uplift and material benefit of the city's young professional men. Left to their own devices, the urban missionaries feared, single men would fall into citified vices like playing mumblety-peg, hanging around saloons, and conversing with harlots. But World War I brought America face-to-face with the results of the stupidity of the Comstock laws, causing a significant change in the nation's attitude towards condoms. “Once they've seen Paris, how are you going to keep them down on the farm?” was the question asked in towns all across America, but fond memories were not all that sexually naïve American soldiers, let loose in wartime Europe, had brought home. America was the only combatant nation to deny condoms to its troops. The result was that 383,000 American soldiers contracted venereal disease — about 60,000 more than were killed or wounded in battle. The nation had learned its lesson. Comstock laws or not, condoms — three to a brightly illustrated tin — were stocked under drugstore counters from coast to coast. Most prominent was the Ramses brand, manufactured by the German-born "condom king," Julius Schmid. He had initially worked as a sausage-stuffer after he landed in New York in the 1880s, but soon found that selling empty casings for customers to stuff their own meat into to be a far more profitable business. Another New Yorker, Merle Young, started the wildly successful Trojan condom company, while Sheiks capitalized on Rudolf Valentino's reputation as a lover and the title of his most famous movie. The Society for the Suppression of Vice never recovered from the blow, and Comstockery in America began a long period of decline. (As for the Society's YMCA backers, they were given their just desserts in 1978 by the Village People.)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Answer This
Nerve Newsletter
© 2012 Nerve.com Inc.
Read, Relate, Connect.
Commentarium (20 Comments)
Yea, there is a chemist here in canada that will refuse to sell anything that might get in the way of 'go's creations'. They won't sell condoms, regular pills or the morning after pills.
Awesome article. Send it to the president.
I didn't realize that only EIGHT states mandated education on use of condoms. I went to school in Texas and don't ever remember being taught much about condoms except to always use them and I unfortunately remember a few instances of being taught "abstinence only" but my High School health class was before Bush, thank goodness.
Are there not any progressives out there trying to turn the Bush Administration toward a dose of REALITY? Thousands of unwed teenage mothers are giving birth to welfare babies, and the majority of these are minorities and illegal immigrants.
For a few million dollars of government money a year THOUSANDS if not HUNDREDS of thousands of unplanned children (and future leeches to government aid) could be prevented by just getting REAL with social issues in America.
Sex is everywhere. Its in books, TV, movies, and radio (despite what the FCC may have against it, its more explicit than ever on prime time television and rated "R" films) and the ever present internet. STDs, HIV, and AIDS are still as ever an issue of public health. How ironic is it that Conservative Rick Perry, the Governor of Texas, wants all the little girls in public schools to be vaccinated for HPV, yet won't also provide the youth of his state with all the neccessary information it takes to FURTHER prevent oneself from infection?!
Education eliminates ignorance, yet ignorance lives on in the youth of today if they can't be informed on the fundamentals of sex and protection. I know I asked my parents about sex as a teen, but its always difficult for any adolescent to ask their parents this stuff. They turn to their peers (misinformation) and the internet (there's a good idea: porn!).
Why does the US still have to rank so LOW on international sexual education standards? Even lesser economic nations and socialistic countries have MUCH lower instances of STDs than we do here.
Can't someone in Washington get a HINT?!
Abstinence only education is no more affective than dieting in America. And we all know how well Americans are with THAT.
I hate to be rude about this, because I've always enjoyed Mr. Mondschien's articles. However, I hope he thinks of changing his photo. To be honest, that photo is kind of creepy--the facial expression and angle are probably to blame. I know you shouldn't judge a book by its cover (or an article by its author's appearance), it kind of...takes away from the subject to see a kind of evil-looking photo of a guy at the end of a well-written piece.
Sorry about that, Kenneth! Your articles are always interesting, but the photo's gotta go!
Pharmacists may not necessarily refuse to sell condoms, but they may impede the purchasing of condoms, especially by minors, by placing condom stocks within their sight close to the dispensing counter. One argument for this practice is that it prevents shoplifting, but surely make-up items (not placed in sight) are more expensive and as easily purloined? What this practice does do is to put condom purchasers under scrutiny and may drive away potential consumers/users.
Additionally, in some states (like mine) the provision of free condoms/condom education to minors is severely restricted. The situation seems like "the house is on fire, but don't wake the kids".
I found your article to be quite informative and interesting, but I was disappointed to see you term "pro-life" activitists as "anti-choice". I am apathetic about the issue of abortion, but a bias like that is unacceptable and it compromises your journalistic integrity. I guess I'll call you "anti-life" and turn the tables on you.
I was once asked if I was married when I tried to buy condoms. When I answered in the negative, they refused to sell me the condoms. I was young and easily embarrassed. I wish, in retrospect, that I had made a fuss like I probably would now.
Thanks for using the term "anti-choice." It's far more accurate than the didactic "pro-life."
I am not a journalist. I am a historian, and history, as Isidore as Seville tells us, is a form of rhetoric. All history is written from a certain perspective; the Whiggish idea of "scientific" and "objective" history is itself written from a certain political point of view (besides which, it's deader than a dodo).
i'm interested in what fordham makes of your book project and these articles. i'm not being critical; i'm honestly interested. the jesuits - i was trained by them, too - are a worldly bunch, but how does your writing fare with the students and faculty? what kind of reactions do you get at the university? and, two cents in, i think the photo is fine.
Honestly, not a lot of people at Fordham know about the column. If they did, they wouldn't care, except maybe as it might impact my chances of getting a job. (If anything, though, academia approves of publications, even non-academic ones.) As for my political positions and personal proclivities, thanks to a little thing called "academic freedom," the school doesn't really have much say in the matter. I try to be as balanced as possible when teaching, but overall, the Church has always had a diversity of voices, Fordham is a very liberal place, and, at the graduate level, utterly the same as any other university of its size - they have more say in how the undergrads conduct themselves, but that's true of any school (and I'd rather have Church paternalism than the PC state school paternalism I experienced as an undergrad). There are professors there who are left, right, gay, straight, Jewish, Catholic, atheist, and Muslim, who sponsor performances of "The Vagina Monologues" and who protest "The Vagina Monologues." I suppose if I got on the wrong side of the Cardinal Newman Society, they might try to get my funding revoked, but then, my department doesn't have to listen to the Cardinal Newman Society. Where Fordham and I are really congruent is that we have a strong belief in social justice, even if my take isn't the Church's. Of course, I'm not Catholic.
What the hell is a "Coney Island whitefish"?!?
That would have been much more interesting if it hadn't turned into an anti-conservative screed. Why not just report the actual history without the left-wing ranting?
TURNED INTO A SCREED?! I don't know how one would tell the story of condoms without coming down on this administration. What's your interest here? Are you defending these policies?
SWTP: Condoms were called "Coney Island whitefish" because you'd often find a fresh catch under the storied boardwalk on Sunday morning. They're about all that'll live off South Brooklyn these days. It's even funnier when you realize "coney" ("con" in French. "conejo" in Spanish), which properly means "rabbit," has been a slang for the female genitals in just about every European language since, like forever. ("Cunt" most likely has the same etymology.)
Great article, fascinating evidence. Wondering where author got those statistics on death from VD in wwi.
SFD: I think it was Costello's "Love, Sex, and War."
The Dutch condom speciality shop Condomerie knows everything about condoms (male and female), safe sex and the history of condoms. They even sell the first condom ever made (which is made of lambskin). More on the history of the condom can be found on there website (http://www.condomerie.com/condoms/condom_history.php). You can also find information about the roll of the catholic church and condom-use.
any chance you have any of these old condom tins for sale or know of any collectors for such a thing?
THX
MO0FqI Can be also this issue because the truth can be achieved only in a dispute :)))
Now you say something