Arielle Duhaime-Ross observes that “condom use — even female condom use — requires a partner’s acceptance”:
That’s where Truvada comes in: the little blue pill is discreet enough to require no participation from sexual partners who might not be willing to help out. And it’s repeatedly shown to be extremely effective at preventing HIV infections when taken daily.
There’s no shortage of evidence linking intimate partner violence to inconsistent condom use. In a 2011 study of over 500 heterosexual men in New York City, researchers found that men who are physically violent with their partners are half as likely to report consistent condom use compared with men who aren’t. And another study, published in 2013, showed that women who were physically abused by their partners in the three months prior to answering the survey were more likely to have had sex without a condom than women who hadn’t experienced that type of violence. …
Thus, the threat of violence during condom negotiation is an important contributor to “risky sex” in abusive relationships — relationships that one in three women in the US will experience. And going through these experiences won’t just affect a woman once, as surviving intimate partner violence can significantly decrease a woman’s confidence when negotiating condom use with future sexual partners. “It’s not that women are stupid, or that they don’t know that they need to protect themselves from HIV,” [Anna] Forbes [of the US Women and PrEP Working Group] says. Rather, it’s that in some situations “the cost of insisting on condoms use is often greater and more immediate than the risk of HIV, either because of partner violence, stigmatization, the risk of the break up of a relationship, or community ostracism — it’s just really tough.”