Participant Profiles
The twenty participants were between the ages of 19 and 35 (mean age 26.8 years old). Seventeen were Zambian nationals, and three were Zimbabwean. The three respondents from Zimbabwe worked in brothels, while the majority of Zambian FSWs found their clients in bars, nightclubs, or on the streets. Four of the FSWs were recruited from areas frequented by assumed lower income clients, twelve from areas with assumed middle income clients, and four from areas with assumed higher income clients. Almost all reported having children and/or dependents; typically, they were the sole financial provider for their families. Thirteen respondents had boyfriends or husbands, and of those, seven reported that their steady partners were married to someone else.
Similar to other studies of FSWs in Africa
[14], with the exception of those working in brothels, most FSWs in this sample were operating without intermediaries. FSWs directly negotiated sexual acts to be performed, including sex with or without a condom, and payment with potential clients. They also handled all financial transactions themselves, which occasionally led to being robbed by clients and others; experiences of violence or threats of violence were common. Almost all of the participants (17 out of the 20 interviewed) reported experiencing physical or sexual abuse, as well as intimidation or threats. The use of alcohol to facilitate participants doing sex work was a dominant theme in the interviews. Half of the respondents reported that they were intoxicated most, if not all, of the time they were with clients
The Context of Sex for FSWs
Our data suggest that both individual and structural-environmental factors place FSWs in this study at increased risk for HIV infection. Reports of unprotected sex with clients and non-paying partners and accounts of sexual encounters with men who appear to have STIs highlight the difficulties FSWs face – both routinely and in confronting men's risk compensation post-MC.
Half of the sample reported having encounters with clients who appeared to be suffering from sexually transmitted infections (STI) or what was assumed to be the signs of HIV infection/AIDS (e.g., “black spots” on their skin). The stories told by these FSWs exemplify such experiences:
Like this guy who came to our room, he tells me, for a short time I will give you K500,000. You look at his penis, and it's almost rotten. You can barely see it. You try to put this penis in a condom and all that comes out is blood and pus, and surely someone in her normal senses would not have sex with such a man.
(28 years old, lower income clients)
…He went ahead and we had live sex [sex without a condom], but before he released, there was blood everywhere. The man was just looking very healthy and he was even wearing a good perfume. He had insisted that he was not sick, but from the look of things… semen is usually white but his was red.
(25 years old, higher income clients)
Several respondents suggested that they could discern if a client was HIV-infected (“sick”) by his appearance; all suggested they would use condoms with men who looked ill. Several also reported that the request for unprotected sex itself was a red flag, as it was assumed that only someone who knew he was HIV-infected would risk live sex with a prostitute.
Condom use was frequent but not consistent. About half of the respondents reported regular condom use with clients although many FSWs told of situations in which condom negotiations were not successful or when they were willing to have live sex. With paying clients, the promise of more money in periods of financial stress was the most common reason for agreeing to unprotected sex, despite acknowledging the risks.
If he has money, I would have sex with him and afterwards go home and take some antibiotics to cleanse myself of any infections that he would have given to me. But there are some clients that look really sick and with those you can't risk not to use a condom.
(32 years old, middle income clients)
Indeed, A few FSWs also reported that when the man was desirable, they would agree to have unprotected sex, as illustrated by this respondent:
Ok, there are times that you look at this man and… like well, this guy looks gorgeous and, not to lie to you, I agree to live sex.
(27 years old, middle income clients)
Half (9 of 20) of the respondents reported never using condoms with non-paying partners. Boyfriends, who were often married to other women, reportedly used a variety of techniques to persuade FSWs to forgo condom use within their relationship, even when her status as a sex worker was known.
For several respondents, feelings of love toward their regular partners and their own sexual desires led them to engage in unprotected sex, even while acknowledging the risks.
Male Circumcision: FSWs understanding of risk and experience with circumcised clients
Descriptions of sexual encounters with paying clients and non-paying partners suggest the multiple challenges faced regularly by FSWs to engage in safer sex. It is into this context of sex that information about male circumcision is interpreted, and the context in which FSWs encounter circumcised men. In the sections that follow we explore how respondents have gained information on MC, how they understand and misunderstand MC's protective effects, and their experience with circumcised clients.
Sources of Information Regarding MC
Respondents' knowledge regarding MC was gained through a variety of sources, including conversations with family, friends, community members, and the clients themselves. For three FSWs, all from Zimbabwe, clients were their only source of information. A few FSWs reported hearing something about MC on television or the radio; one recalled hearing news stories of parents bringing their sons to clinics to be circumcised, and two reported that while they had heard mention of MC in the media, they could not remember what was said as they were not paying close attention. Two reported seeing posters or stickers about MC in a clinic setting, and one was advised of the benefits of MC when she gave birth to her son (she declined to have him circumcised). Finally, one FSW reported that she had heard about MC from outreach workers distributing condoms. Thus, while most respondents had heard of MC from multiple sources, the majority had not received comprehensive information on MC from a reliable source.
Female sex workers' understanding of male circumcision
All of the respondents had heard of MC and could define it, when prompted, as the removal of the foreskin. At the same time however, nearly all of the respondents indicated that their understanding of MC was not complete. For example, when asked for elaboration, or when prompted to provide more details, respondents replied with phrases such as “nothing else, that is all” (21 years old, lower income clients) or “That is all I heard” (34 years old, middle income clients). The relatively superficial information on MC received contributed to how FSWs understood the information, and how they reconciled it with their existing – largely accurate – knowledge of how HIV is transmitted and their sexual experiences with circumcised men. The result was that respondents were largely skeptical of MC's ability to protect against HIV, but believed some benefits to MC were plausible, and others pleasurable. Their understanding of specific aspects of MC, including potentially protective effects for men and women, are presented below.
A widely-held view that emerged from the interviews was the depiction of the foreskin as “dirty,” and a place where diseases are harbored; therefore, its removal makes a man “clean” and less likely to get “sick.” Many shared the idea that circumcision allows a man to more thoroughly clean his genitalia after sex, thus washing away infections and reducing the chances of disease acquisition. Similarly, since circumcised men were seen as cleaner, some FSWs expressed the belief that they were less likely to transmit infections to sexual partners after exposure, as an infection could not survive on the penis without a foreskin. Others, however, noted that infections could also be passed via semen, thus a condom offered greater protection than circumcision.
Indeed, many FSWs (11 of 20) expressed doubt that MC offered any protective effects for women, a few believed it offered protection against STIs and one believed it protected against HIV (the remainder of responses were not clear). FSWs who did not believe that MC protects women typically responded as follows:
I: For women, is MC more, less, or as effective as condoms in protecting against HIV infection?
R: Women should continue to use condoms to protect themselves other than saying ‘my partner is circumcised hence I can't get any infection.’ A condom should still be used.
I: When did you understand this?
R: Just from my own thoughts, nobody told me about it.
(27 years old, middle income clients)
I: If a man is circumcised does it protect his female sex partners from getting HIV?
R: If he doesn't use a condom you can get HIV whether circumcised or not.
I: Is MC more, less, or as effective as condoms in protecting against HIV infection?
R: A condom should ever be there – that's the one I know protects.
(35 years old, middle income clients)
There was some confusion in regard to the protection MC offered for men. The concept of partial efficacy of MC was not well understood by the respondents; rather, the most common understanding of MC was that it was fully effective in preventing the transmission of STIs, but not effective for reducing the transmission of HIV from women to men. This was articulated in many similar ways by the respondents:
They say because they are circumcised, they can't get sick, yet it's not really true. They are only protected from STIs.
(23 years old, middle income clients)
I: Does MC protect a man from getting HIV?
R: No, he can still contract HIV, maybe he is protected from small, small diseases like syphilis and other STIs.
(32 yrs. old, middle income clients)
As such, MC was not widely believed to be an HIV prevention strategy, but was viewed by some (7 of 20) as preventive against STIs for men. There was no class distinction evident in the data; sex workers who had lower, middle, and higher income clients expressed this belief.
Five of the FSWs believed that MC was protective for men against STI and HIV transmission, but each offered caveats. One respondent suggested that MC is protective only if the man does not have a cut on his penis. For two respondents, “dry sex” could still result in HIV infection. As one FSW explained:
I: Can a man still get HIV if he has been circumcised?
R: Yes, he can get it.
I: In which way?
R: Through dry sex.
I: What if it's wet sex and no bruises, can one still get HIV?
R: No he can't.
(34 years old, middle income clients)
In the absence of a full understanding of MC, some respondents used their understanding of other HIV prevention and treatment efforts to inform their opinions of MC. For example, one FSW used anecdotal information about antiretroviral (ARV) therapy to speculate what the protective effect of MC might be:
I wouldn't really know because I don't know the truth behind all this… I think on another angle I can believe it because just like they talk about ARVs, they say if you take them, you gain weight, and people gain for real, so it's the same with circumcision. [When] people say they can't get diseases, it could be true.
(25 years old, higher income clients)
Similarly some relied on information about general HIV transmission in formulating their beliefs about MC efficacy. As one FSW explains:
I don't believe that [MC is protective] because diseases are found in the blood, not because someone is circumcised.
(27 years old, middle income clients)
For others, incomplete or conflicting information lead them to discount the idea of MC as protective against either/both STIs and HIV. Notably, the three respondents who had received information about MC only from the clients themselves expressed the clearest doubt in regard to MC's potentially protective effects.
Despite these uncertainties or skepticism, however, many FSWs expressed a preference for circumcised sexual partners. This respondent's comments were representative of those who suggested that circumcised men were cleaner, “sweeter” (a term having to do with pleasure), and better lovers (as they were slower to ejaculate).
Those that are circumcised are sweet. Even if they wear a condom, it just feels like it is live [unprotected].
(23 years old, middle income clients)
Although the respondents expressed a preference for circumcised clients, there was no price difference between what FSWs charged men who were circumcised for sex, and what they charged men who were not circumcised.
Condom Negotiations and Use with Circumcised Clients
Although almost all respondents had incomplete information about MC, nearly all reported that a condom is the best available protection from HIV transmission, even if they break (either by accident or as the result of sabotage) or are not used for other reasons.
I: Do you believe that circumcision protects a man from getting HIV?
R: Not even a bit, I do not believe that.
I: Have you heard that circumcision gives more protection, about the same amount of protection or less protection than the condom?
R: Condoms give more protection.
I: Why?
R: Because that man will release his sperm in the condom and also my vaginal fluids will end up just around the condom, so the one who is circumcised is not safe if he's not wearing a condom.
(30 years old, high income clients)
All of the FSWs in the study had experience with circumcised clients. For two respondents, this experience was limited to one client, however for many of the FSWs interviewed, in their estimations, at least half of their clients were circumcised. Many reported that the number of MC clients was continuously increasing. While most men, regardless of circumcision status, tried to negotiate unprotected or “live” sex, as previously noted, circumcised clients used their circumcision status as a bargaining tool to convince FSWs to have unprotected sex. The following quotes suggest the process:
One who is circumcised will argue with you for hours that his penis is clean and you can't get diseases.
(30 years old, higher income clients)
They [circumcised men] do insist on live sex, yes. And they say that they are clean and can't get diseases like STIs. Though I have not had a lot of circumcised men, at least those I have had insisted on live sex.
(23 years old, middle income clients)
Okay, let me say a lot of people are not yet educated about this circumcision thing. They think once you are circumcised you are a free man and you can't get sick. Okay they have got that part all wrong, most of them wouldn't want to use a condom.
(21 years old, higher income clients)
One respondent's comments illustrate the role of alcohol in jeopardizing condom use:
I: Do you sometimes give the circumcised men the benefit of doubt that you can't get diseases from them if they ask for live sex?
R: Yes, … sometimes we get drunk and when you look at a man, just the way he looks, sometimes we lose our senses and have live sex with that man.
(27 years old, middle income clients)
Some sex workers in the study suggested that circumcised men took other sexual risks as a result of their MC. As one FSW explained:
I think circumcision is just making men become stupid when it comes to issues of sex… These men are supposed to be told the risks of having live sex, even when they are circumcised, but it looks like they are told that they are safe now– they think that they can screw anybody they want.
(30 years old, higher income clients)
Sex with Recently Circumcised Clients
Three of the twenty FSWs interviewed reported having clients who were very recently circumcised:
…I think it was recent because the tip of his penis looked red. I even asked him if he was circumcised recently and he said yes… I didn't ask him [when], but I think he was well healed.
(27 years old, middle income clients)
I: The one who came with the stitches, was the wound still looking fresh?
R: Yes, it was.
I: Like he had undergone circumcision how many days ago?
R: He told me by then it was like two weeks ago… He said his wife refused to have sex with him, and that is why he came looking for a sex worker.
(25 years old, higher income clients)
In recalling these experiences, the FSWs again highlighted the impact of poverty on sexual decision making:
R: As an adult, some usually have stitches on the penis.
I: That is before the stitches fall off – before they are completely healed?
R: Yes, before they are completely healed.
I: Don't you get scared that maybe the wound can bleed or something?
R: We do, but you just have to be strong because you need the money.
(21 years old, lower income clients)
I: Didn't you mind having sex with him if he had stiches?
R: No, because all I want is the money.
‘I: When you were having sex with him did he seem to enjoy it, or was it painful?
R: I think it was painful because after the act there was lots of blood in the condom.
(25 years old, higher income clients)
All reporting using condoms with these clients, although it required some negotiation.