Oral-genital sex:
It is probably true that mouth-to-genital sex is relatively benign biologically -- particularly when compared to oral-anal or anal sex (i.e., mouth-to-anus or penis-in-anus). After all, the mouth is designed to handle all kinds of food and it possesses numerous protective factors in the saliva. Once swallowed and beyond the esophagus, ingested material is subject to the strong processing fluids of the stomach and intestines. As such, the use of the mouth for sexual stimulation is probably fairly ‘safe.’ However, if the sex organ has an infection, or has recently been in contact with infectious germs (e.g., from the rectum), oral infections of sexually transmitted diseases can and do occur.
The owner of the sex organ being fellated may also be at risk. If their partner’s mouth contains pathogens, the sex organ is relatively unprotected against assaults by salivary-borne germs. Unlike the mouth, the penis has few protective defenses. So a person with infectious organisms in his mouth can infect a sex organ.
Not only is this possible, it occurs with regularity when homosexual group sex is involved. For example, earlier this year, four men were arrested one night for having "group sex" on a trail in Omaha, Nebraska.1 Under dim lighting, men who have sex with men [MSM] took all kinds of biological risks to enjoy the psychological ‘thrill’ of having an orgy in a public place, knowing such conduct was against the law.
As clearly, the many MSM who have sex with unknown men in restrooms and rest areas run the same kinds of biological risks. In one of the few random samples of men who call themselves homosexuals, 66% said that they had had sex in public restrooms and 88% said that they had engaged in orgies.2 Oral-anal sex:
Unlike mouth-to-genital sex, mouth-to-anus activities cannot possibly be considered medically benign. There is simply no way to ‘safely’ lick or insert the tongue into the anus without ingesting biologically significant amounts of fecal material. Not only do a host of viruses (e.g., Hepatitis A), bacteria, and other infectious organisms (e.g., Giardiasis, amebiasis) reside in feces, but various forms of hepatitis, herpes and many of the same organisms that cause food poisoning are transmitted through its ingestion.3
Separating feces from the food chain and living areas via modern sanitation has arguably been the single most important contribution of modern public health. Avoiding the ingestion of fecal material in either food or in sex practices is healthy; any oral exposure to feces is unhealthy. This is precisely what much of modern ‘sanitation’ is about.
To re-introduce intimate exposure to feces in the name of "sexually expressive behavior" -- "critical to forging healthy relationships" -- is biological insanity. Ingesting feces is far removed from anything that could rightfully be called "healthy."
Indeed, in 1981, at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, Dr. M Heller, Director of the Division of Emergency Medicine at the University of California’s Moffitt Hospital, San Francisco, observed4 that "the large number of patients, virtually all male and all gay, with these diseases [various enteric infections collectively called ‘gay bowel syndrome’] is indeed a new phenomenon" which he noted was associated with "the emergence of a well-defined ‘gay scene,’ including gay bars, restaurants, movies, clubs, indeed whole neighborhoods catering openly to the gay lifestyle."
The recipient of oral-anal sex is not immune to infection either. Unlike the mouth, the anus is designed to eliminate waste, not to process and incorporate semen, saliva, etc. So it has few protective devices. The mouth can and does transmit sexual infections to the anus. Ultimately, for either the ‘doer’ or the one to whom oral-anal sex is done, the claim that "engaging in... anal sex does not result in... physical dysfunction" is absolutely false. Penile-anal sex:
Placing a penis in the anus is also fraught with medical risks. For the recipient, there is good evidence to suggest that the rectum and anus are negatively affected over the long term by the insertion and movements of the penis during sexual activity. Men who are the recipients of penile-anal sex are many times more apt to develop anal or rectal cancer and to lose sphincter tonus, perhaps up to 20 times the national average.5 Those who put their penis in others’ rectal cavities are also more apt to get urinary infections. After all, the penis is bathed in feces or surrounded by fecal residue during the process.
The bottom line is that the rectum was not designed for sexual activity. Indeed, because of its one-cell-wall thickness and rich supply of blood vessels, the rectum is almost ‘perfectly suited for infection.’ This is undoubtedly the reason that the vast majority of MSM who have gotten infected with HIV practiced penile-anal sex.
While only a smattering of evidence suggests that the ‘insertor’ of the penis has contracted HIV from anal sex, there is overwhelming evidence that the rectal ‘insertees’ got their HIV from penile-anal sex. Indeed, the practice of penile-anal sex is associated with well over 95% of all HIV infections among MSM.
There is also fair evidence that a disproportionate degree of HIV infection among women is due to penile-anal as opposed to penile-vaginal sex.6 The same is true of hepatitis B, syphilis, and all the other blood-borne pathogens. In short, the natural functions of the rectum (e.g., efficient absorption of water and other nutrients from the fecal mass) act to make it unsuitable for penile intromission.
Furthermore, there is good evidence that depositions of semen in the rectum are deleterious, per se, to the functioning of the immune system. This was first demonstrated in rabbits and has been confirmed in both male and female prostitutes.7 Oral & Anal Sex: Not Benign
Analysis of the obituaries of over 9,000 gay men suggests that they are unusually subject to cancer of the mouth, pharynx, stomach, and esophagus, all of which may be related to typical sexual practices among MSM of ingesting semen, urine or feces.8 Indeed, while the constellations of morbidities differ between the groups (with men who have sex with men [MSM] exhibiting higher rates of infectious diseases than heavy drinkers or illicit, but non-shooting/non-IV drug users), the lifespans of MSM are similar to the lifespans of very heavy drinkers or heavy consumers of illicit drugs, but not as short as regular IV drug abusers.
The evidence on women who have sex with women [WSW] is less certain, but it appears that their lifespan may be only a few years longer on average than the lifespan of MSM. Activities do not have to be injurious every time to be medically dangerous
Certainly, while not every penile-anal or oral-anal sex act is likely to be deleterious, one’s penis need not ‘fall off’ or one’s rectum ‘explode’ for there to be physical dysfunction.
Although adults who regularly engage in homosexuality probably make up less than 3% of the adult population,10 investigators who have conducted random surveys have reported that homosexuals generate between 15%11 and 12%12 of all sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). These very oral and anal sexual activities and the diseases with which they are associated led to the banning of all blood from MSM at U.S. blood banks in 1985 -- a ban that has spread and is currently maintained throughout the civilized world. Also, in 1996 the U.S. Centers for Disease Control considered both male and female homosexuality as independent "risk factors" for HIV infection in its first national sexuality survey.13