Government emphasizes that research and monitoring is important for policy as well as managing of HIV/AIDS. One of the most gender-sensitive priorities in this regard is a clear focus on microbicides development (DoH, 2007). The idea of this is creating female-controlled technology that would put women in control of HIV-prevention. The biggest criticism of this is that the responsibility of prevention lies only in the hands of women. The positive aspect is that women are then in control of a prevention method (Ramjee, 2000). This is two sides of the same coin.
Another gender related focus of this key priority is to support research regarding male circumcision. Research carried out by the World Health Organisation (2007) in South Africa, Kenya and Uganda has shown very clear benefits of male circumcision. According to WHO the risk of infection reduces by 60% if heterosexual men are circumcised. One of the greatest benefits of male circumcision is that it safeguards men to some extent in situations where condoms are not used. The aim of promoting circumcision should not be to replace condom use, but to add additional protection for men. According to Sawires et al (2006) male circumcision reduces the prevalence of HIV amongst men, and indirectly also protects women. To create a sustaining benefit, it is important that circumcision takes place in sterile circumstances. Sawires et al (2006) also question if male circumcision can not be seen as a form of genital mutilation and warn that the promotion of male circumcision can lead to arguments for female genital mutilation. Although research by Sawires et al (2006) shows very clearly that male circumcision has a health benefit that is clearly not found with female genital mutilation, this aspect should be considered.
