In the last few months, the media has buzzed about the hottest new sexually transmitted infection to grace the nation, one that has been linked to serious health problems like cervical cancer. Part of that buzz has been the advertising campaign to promote Gardasil, the inoculation against the virus. But as I have followed the media's frenzy over HPV, I have become increasingly alarmed.

Wanting to be a responsible healthcare connoisseur (not to mention wanting to keep my cervix intact), but not loving the prospect of voluntarily offering up my arm as a pincushion, I decided to do my own investigation of HPV and the vaccine.

Don't get me wrong; I'm all for the HPV vaccine. As a rule, I'm very anti-cancer - a stance I think most people share. My beef has to do with one little detail I have never read in the news coverage: men.

After poking around the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's website, I learned that men are equally as likely to be carriers of the virus as women are. Maybe that's not such a shocker, but this led me to wonder why all the commercials for the vaccine featured little Suzy riding around on her skateboard, talking about how she wanted to be "one less."

Why was little Sam distressingly less concerned with contracting HPV? The answer is that the vaccine has not yet been licensed for men. Why, you ask? Because testing of the vaccine on men began only recently; its effectiveness and side effects are still being investigated.

But this is the part that confuses me. Despite the fact that men and women are equally vulnerable to this disease, women were targeted first for STI prevention - a prevention that includes multiple painful injections, as well as high costs to either the patient or the government.

This raises some serious questions. Why is it that women were targeted first in a seemingly guinea pig-like fashion? Why is it that, once again, sexual health responsibility falls singularly upon the shoulders of women?

Please do not disregard this as the rantings of a bitter feminist. I am concerned for men, too. According to the CDC, there is evidence to suggest a possible link between HPV and genital cancer in men as well. So while little Suzy can skateboard off into the sunset, carefree little Sam has to worry about the possibility of contracting penial or anal cancer somewhere down the road. This hardly seems fair.

The real question is, why did this disparity in research and, consequentially, in treatment exist at all? It seems like everyone stands to gain something from this treatment. Without it, men have a lot to (ahem) lose. And that would be a shame.

Kate Truesdell is an LSA senior and a member of the Daily's editorial board.