TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Eryemil Archive

View 30 posts and 6,824 comments by Eryemil on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
113

DiscriminationEryemil/r/MensRights18/02/15 12:22 PM
49

NewsEryemil/r/MensRights07/03/15 03:19 AM
46

Eryemil/r/MensRights25/06/13 04:59 PM
40

Eryemil/r/MensRights12/04/16 06:10 PM
29

Eryemil/r/MensRights28/05/13 02:58 AM
27

Eryemil/r/MensRights15/03/12 04:04 PM
26

Eryemil/r/MensRights13/12/12 09:51 AM
25

Eryemil/r/MensRights14/05/14 04:15 AM
21

Eryemil/r/MensRights28/09/11 08:59 PM
20

Eryemil/r/MensRights30/04/14 03:46 AM
19

Eryemil/r/MensRights19/09/13 11:40 PM
17

Eryemil/r/MensRights27/10/12 07:28 PM
13

Eryemil/r/MensRights07/10/11 01:20 PM
13

Eryemil/r/MensRights20/09/12 06:32 PM
13

Eryemil/r/MensRights31/03/13 09:30 PM
12

Eryemil/r/MensRights01/05/13 05:54 PM
10

Eryemil/r/MensRights22/08/12 08:39 AM
9

Eryemil/r/MensRights23/10/11 01:47 PM
9

IntactivismEryemil/r/MensRights11/06/15 03:26 AM
9

Edu./Occu.Eryemil/r/MensRights16/09/15 04:24 AM
7

Eryemil/r/MensRights02/11/11 11:39 PM
5

Eryemil/r/MensRights14/08/12 06:00 PM
4

Eryemil/r/MensRights01/04/13 02:19 PM
4

Eryemil/r/MensRights08/11/13 02:39 AM
2

Eryemil/r/MensRights20/12/12 03:47 PM
1

Eryemil/r/MensRights06/02/14 06:32 PM
0

Activism/SupportEryemil/r/MensRights22/05/15 03:28 PM
0

Eryemil/r/MensRights16/12/12 07:03 AM
0

Eryemil/r/MensRights06/06/12 01:54 AM
0

Eryemil/r/MensRights08/10/11 01:14 PM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 6,824 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

'Playing with dolls' is an extremely gendered behaviour. Even our primate cousins exhibit strong gendered differences in toy selection.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 08:05 PM
1

You're literally going to stand your ground and defend being a petty dickhead by pointing out someone's supposed spelling mistake and being wrong about it? That's pathetic at two meta levels, at least. You need to have a very hard bit of self-reflection on what that says about you as a person. ​
/r/MensRights27/02/19 08:02 PM
0

You'd think with such a "high IQ" you'd be able to spell criticize. That's the Commonwealth spelling you ignorant child.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 07:54 PM
1

That's your opinion. I disagree with it. There's nothing else to be said between us; I have nothing to gain from continuing this exchange. Have a good day.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 07:50 PM
0

Most scientific research is conducted by socially liberal people regardless of field---economics might be an exception. High IQ generally correlates with left-leaning politics. Feel free to criticise their methodologies. If you think it's poor evidence feel free to counter with better quality evidence.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 07:49 PM
1

It's a cost benefit analysis; yay utilitarianism. The relevant authorities currently recommend this course of action; whether it proves to prevent more harm than it causes will take longer to determine. If you think these things are always so clear cut, remember that about 1,000,000 American parents will choose to mutilate the genitals of their sons this year, based on nothing but decades outdated information and cultural momentum.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 07:46 PM
1

Sorry do you have any credible scientific sources from the relevant authorities? I don't read conservative conspiracy rags.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 07:44 PM
1

Many here uses the sub for daily 5mins hate stomping. Then they go to real life. As usual, surveys are may be attended by loud mouths as in feminism. It'd help if you could quote some kind of MR authority that agrees with you. I honestly have no idea where you're getting these disillusional notiosn from. Last I checked I've never seen an article on A Voice for Men saying how we should all go back to good ol' traditional family values. My point is how it should be ethically and practically. Some …
/r/MensRights27/02/19 07:42 PM
0

One of those ways is to ensure the child goes through puberty which will cure trans children most of the time. That doesn't help the children whose dysphoria persists post-puberty; blockers does. ​
/r/MensRights27/02/19 07:36 PM
0

Read this.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 07:35 PM
1

Puberty solves gender dysphoria for the overwhelming majority of those afflicted. Citation needed.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 07:27 PM
1

Where are you getting this from? Have you read the results from the latest MR survey? MRM is not a conservative, family values movement. Most of us are socially liberal atheists and a disproportionate percentage are gay/bisexual. We absolutely encourage men to GTOW and stand in solidarity with that movement.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 07:23 PM
1

Read the articles.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 06:42 PM
1

This is it a 'family' movement; it's a men's movement. If anything the MR consensus is not to get married or have children. Though we do help men that make that mistake.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 05:53 PM
7

Thank you.
/r/MensRights27/02/19 11:39 AM
1

Now suddenly it's back to "quality of life." No, we're discussing depression and suicide risk. There is zero evidence that transitioning reduces suicide. WHY are you lying? I just don't understand why you're so invested in this narrative. 1 2 3 4 5 6 EDIT This is a flat out bald-faced political activist statement. There are plenty of "authorities" who feel just the opposite. There really aren't. As far as I know all relevant medical organizations in the developed world disagree with you. -------…
/r/MensRights27/02/19 11:27 AM
1

There are lots of diseases with no effective treatments. Hormone treatment and SRS are considered effective by the relevant authorities. There is zero evidence for this. Read this.
/r/MensRights26/02/19 09:34 PM
1

There are many ways to treat depression besides irreversable surgery and hormone treatment There are no effective treatments for gender dysphoria beyond hormone therapy and potentially SRS. Like I said, there are no good numbers on the suicide rate. They simply don't exist. As I said above the claim that SRS doesn't not reduce suicide is arguable, that is not true for hormones. Hormone treatment for gender dysphoria is effective at reducing suicide rates among trans-identified people.
/r/MensRights26/02/19 09:23 PM
1

I used suicide as an example but that doesn't mean it's the only factor that matters; a massive reduction in rates of depression is justification alone. And there is pretty good evidence that hormone therapy has a positive impact on suicide rates, which is a lot more relevant to the discussion at hand than the impact of SRS. Also, I'd like to see your source for the claim that post-op trans people have higher rates of suicide. Sounds like you're quoting much abused study by Cecilia Dhejne's team…
/r/MensRights26/02/19 08:56 PM
1

90% reduction in depression is not insignificant.
/r/MensRights26/02/19 03:55 PM
–

There is zero solid evidence that sex change operations reduce the suicide rate. Largest study on the subject I can think of shows a 90% reduction in depression post-transition. ​
/r/MensRights26/02/19 03:43 PM
1

Even transitioning is not a silver bullet. If you're born trans chances are you're destined to a miserable shitty life regardless but there are ways to make things better. ​
/r/MensRights26/02/19 03:35 PM
1

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're a troll, dickhead.
/r/MensRights26/02/19 12:01 AM
0

It's ethical to do whatever you want with a corpse as long as the owners allow it. Fuck it, eat it, blend it and turn it into paint for modern art. A living body is not a corpse. That said, if you can be certain the person is dead e.g. most of the brain except the brain stem has been removed then the body has the same moral worth as a corpse. Feel free to eat or fuck it too---with consent from the owners obviously.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 11:00 PM
1

That's very poor logic, which is saying a lot given some of the replies so far.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 10:53 PM
1

On the other hand, if women don't start having kids the developed world will collapse.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 09:08 PM
1

The ethics applies to what you do with them. Yes and I've already made my views on the subject quite clear. I'm not sure where you are going with this. ​
/r/MensRights25/02/19 09:07 PM
1

No I strongly disagree with you that corpses have any ethical worth. They're not moral agents and thus inconsequential.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 09:00 PM
1

Sorry are we talking law or ethics here? I'm obviously expressing my belief of things as they should be not as they presently are. What is legal is not necessarily what is right; you would think that someone in this subreddit of all places would understand that obvious fact.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 08:19 PM
1

Counseling and treating gender dysphoria as a psychological condition is also advisable. ​ Or children get cured of their gender dysphoria after certain age after getting good psychological counseling and forgets the whole thing as nothing happened. Do you have any evidence that this is an effective treatment? Most authorities on the subject do not believe so. ​
/r/MensRights25/02/19 08:06 PM
1

That's not an option. Either you don't use blockers and trans girls kill themselves because they grow up to look like me in dress or you do and some of these children grow up not to be trans and kill themselves because the blockers had adverse effects As a parent you get to pick one. If you choose wrong things might be OK. Or your child dies.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 07:46 PM
1

Which brings us back to the question; which one is preferable? Sometimes even the obvious answer evades people for decades e.g. the popularity of male genital mutilation in the US.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 07:41 PM
1

As I said, there are no easy solutions. Either choice is going to lead to some kids killing themselves because things are not OK. This is a perfect scenario where a utilitarian approach shines---which of these imperfect choices is going to lead to the least suffering?
/r/MensRights25/02/19 07:21 PM
1

Generally what they do for young trans kid is use blockers to delay puberty until some kind of mental health authority can determine whether more aggressive treatment is needed. Specially with trans girls this is vital as it's very difficult to feminise a body once testosterone has had its way with it, leaving trans girls unable to attain a female appearance, which in turn leads to worse mental health outcomes. This is one of those issues that doesn't really have a painless solution---at either …
/r/MensRights25/02/19 07:13 PM
1

Well I disagree with you. Harvest ALL the corpses.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 06:31 PM
1

Yes. You can make the argument that it belongs to family members in the same way other possessions of the deceased but that's not the same thing. Once you are dead you cease to exist and your body should cease to have any legal recognition or status beyond that of personal property.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 02:29 PM
1

Are you serious? That's not how any of that works.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 02:25 PM
1

I disagree.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 01:50 PM
1

Corpses have no rights.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 01:22 PM
1

Mandatory post-mortem organ harvesting.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 01:11 PM
1

Fuck altruism. I'll take a functioning system instead.
/r/MensRights25/02/19 12:47 PM
1

I don't believe in objective morality and I'm very wary of anyone that preaches they've found 'truth'. Sooner or later they'll get pissed off when you refuse to follow their rules. I'll pass.
/r/MensRights22/02/19 11:17 PM
1

That's... Incredibly poor logic. Also there's no need to resort to personal attacks. The point of contention here is not whether Ayn Rand was the first---and I never claimed her position in that hierarchy had an impact on how figure or wrong she was---but whetyer these philosophies are valid ethical theories. You'd think being an MRA would have helped you realise that human values are diverse and different people care about different things than you do. It seems that you believe there is a one t…
/r/MensRights22/02/19 11:29 AM
1

Hedonism and egoism are valid philosophical theories. She was hardly the first proponent. Next thing you're going to say Singer is scum for being a utilitarian.
/r/MensRights22/02/19 01:41 AM
1

The lack of proof for once. It's possible it has but there's very little evidence connecting objectivism specifically to clear efforts of genocide, planned famine etc. And if we can't judge a philosophy by the ripples it causes in the physical world what should we judge it on? I think you've jumped on the Rand hate bandwagon. She was a shitty writer and not a brilliant philosopher but hardly meriting this level of vitriol.
/r/MensRights21/02/19 11:52 AM
1

She is an important figure in the history of individualist politics and philosophy. It'd be like hiding the face of Marx---less so actually because objectivism so far hasn't inspired political movements that have caused the death of 100 million people.
/r/MensRights21/02/19 11:35 AM
1

Ayn Rand's face has been blanked out in case anyone reads this post while eating breakfast. Why? ​
/r/MensRights21/02/19 02:17 AM
15

I don't give a single shit about how many girls are involved in my hobbies, even if the number is zero---the sex of the people I might associate with in that context has no impact on my potential enjoyment. I do on the other hand care about being excluded from participating in events on the basis of my sex by companies I patronize and would choose to no longer give them my business. You are free to the the same. I do hope they had a viable business justification for negatively singling out their…
/r/MensRights18/02/19 11:40 AM
1

Japanese work culture is not to blame for similarly low birth rates in Italy and Germany. The problem started when women joined the workforce and nothing short of radical technological advancement has a hope of resolving it.
/r/MensRights05/02/19 04:27 PM
3

I understand that men are biologically wired to care about women, want to protect them etc. and I also understand the power of pussy. But at the end of the day this is the world straight men chose; women have the power you have chosen to give them. If men cared about the suffering of their fellow guys society would look a lot different but the only thing guys care about is your relative status compared to other guys and the well-being of women. And of course women themselves will always choose w…
/r/MensRights04/02/19 03:46 PM
1

I've seen among my male gay friends with children that one dad will take on a soft, maternal role and the other will be strict paternal parent. Children of gay couples do pretty well but I'd love two see the difference in outcome between male couples and lesbian couples. I think the added resources, time and attention of a two parent household probably makes the biggest difference overall but I'm curious about how much boys on particular rely on male role models.
/r/MensRights02/02/19 05:02 PM
1

As someone already pointed out your numbers are off; also, this reads to me a bit like the MRA version of Hillary's "Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat."
/r/MensRights01/02/19 07:59 PM
5

Rape is an industry to feminists and outrage farmers. Asking them to support programs that actually reduce rape is like asking tobacco companies to support programs that reduce smoking.
/r/MensRights26/01/19 05:56 PM
1

It's alarming that so many posters here seem to believe that just because the left is full of gynocentric feminists that the right must thus have a proportionate number of people that genuinely care about male suffering, as if the world was some kind of video game. Such an expectation of balance or fairness is extremely naive; there's no universal mandate that says of two opposing sides one must be the good that contrasts the bad---oftentimes every side in a conflict is shitty in different ways.…
/r/MensRights25/01/19 11:30 AM
4

"Accuracy" is fractal. At some arbitrary threshold you have to decide how much detail is necessary in an informational image and how much is too much.
/r/MensRights24/01/19 03:48 AM
1

That would be more accurate but less impactful. I think this is a better illustration.
/r/MensRights23/01/19 07:26 PM
3

As a Latin gay dude: no, fuck that shit. Intersectionality is divisive cancer. I like it when it's tearing my opponents apart, making them figure each other and destroying their communities. Why would I want to inflict that curse upon my allies? The MRM has miraculously managed to remain politically unpartisan and colorblind and I like it that way.
/r/MensRights22/01/19 06:20 PM
3

I've come across men that are suicidal for all kinds of reasons or no reason at all. Depression is a neurological disease as much as one of opportunity. Let me tell you about most of the guys I counsel: they're depressed because their ex-wives won't let them see their kids. They're depressed because they just got divorced and lost most of what they'd been working on for years. They're are depressed because they're not tall/handsome and feel they'll never be able to find a partner. They're depres…
/r/MensRights22/01/19 05:07 PM
1

As an MRA I focus my attention on actual, quantifiable issues I can address e.g. supporting organisations fighting against genital mutilation, donating time and money to organisations helping fathers get custody of their kids and helping men get legal representation during divorce, helping men being domestically abused by women, helping homeless men, helping men get sober, helping men falsely accused of rape, counseling suicidal men. Western society is broken and I have no interest in saving it.…
/r/MensRights22/01/19 04:15 PM
1

There's no possible reconciliation between our viewpoints so there is no point in continuing this discussion.
/r/MensRights22/01/19 03:46 PM
10

Men are worse off than women by virtually every metric of well-being there is. Society simply doesn't care about male suffering.
/r/MensRights22/01/19 02:44 PM
1

It's not random at all, more and more children are being raised by single mothers; a lot can be out at their feet. If boys and girls are not growing up right increasingly that blame goes to mothers failing their children, not to men. But that's not what feminists show us. Time and Time again we're told that it is men's responsibility to change themselves and others without ever even mentioning the fact that women are failing men, failing their sons, their husbands, their brothers. Look at the Gi…
/r/MensRights22/01/19 02:37 PM
1

You call it toxic masculinity yet women are just as if not more culpable for the disregard of male suffering as other men are. Women have a greater in-group bias than men; they care about other women more than they do about men, while men are the opposite they care more about women than themselves or are at most neutral. Is that what you call toxic masculinity? Also, you ignore the first and most important part of my post. Men have hufe, real problems. They're killing themselves because their li…
/r/MensRights22/01/19 01:49 PM
1

Men commit suicide because their lives are harder and they suffer more and receive less empathy and support.
/r/MensRights22/01/19 01:34 PM
14

These disgusting old hags are literally old school flesh-consuming ghouls. Like Baba Yaga or Elizabeth Bathory.
/r/MensRights21/01/19 01:11 PM
1

There's no such thing as toxic masculinity.
/r/MensRights17/01/19 03:21 PM
1

I don't see an issue with this. The director acknowledges that both male and female default gender roles come with drawbacks---she explicitly cites victimhood and self-pitying attitudes of women which is something that gets brought up by MRAs all the time. Unless you believe evolution creates optimal organisms or we were made perrect by some deity there's nothing controversial about saying both sexes' intrinsic natures have shortcomings, pitfalls and weaknesses that we could improve upon. It onl…
/r/MensRights17/01/19 02:09 PM
2

I have a beard.
/r/MensRights16/01/19 06:11 PM
-3

We're being brigaded hard by idiots from r/The_Donald
/r/MensRights15/01/19 11:17 PM
2

While we're discussing our personal predictions about the future; (yours being white genocide and the end of Western Civilization) I don't agree with your outcomes at all. Not because I don't believe it's not a valid projection, given current trends; the statistics are clear. Most of our countries are undergoing demographic collapse. If nothing changes our future is dire. Let me ask you this though: have you ever heard of a guy called Malthus? He proposed in the 1700s that we were headed towards…
/r/MensRights15/01/19 06:03 PM
2

As a gay man, and someone that loves and appreciates other guys and what they contribute to the world, while I am sympathetic to the plight of straight guys I am not the self-sacrificing type. My life is freaking great as it is right now and I have no desire to give up my well-being for anyone or anything. The moment the MRM becomes another limb of the traditionalist/religious/regressive subset of our culture that wants to take us back in time is the moment I join the feminists. The MRM is as la…
/r/MensRights15/01/19 04:49 PM
1

There's like three or four honest to God crossposts from The_Donald on the front page. I feel like I'm in bizarro world.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 03:23 PM
1

What is it with all these tradcons suddenly invading this subreddit?
/r/MensRights15/01/19 03:00 PM
10

I already do. Maybe if you could say the same you wouldn't be such a bitter shell of a person.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 11:59 AM
6

I just did last night; gave my hubby an awesome BJ. Using oral sex as a means to insult/attack others might be one of the most counterproductive things in the universe; no wonder straight men are sex-starved.
/r/MensRights15/01/19 11:55 AM
1

Trans men have facial hair and body hair need razors like everyone else. Also, most people here don't agree with your brand of conservatism so go be a dick somewhere else
/r/MensRights15/01/19 11:49 AM
3

I've been to plenty of clothing optional events with families around (Rainbow Gathering as an example) and it's never been an issue. Jesus Christ the whining in those tweets women can be so fucking fragile and pathetic. Im mostly sheltered from it as a gay dude and then I see shit like this and it just baffles me.
/r/MensRights14/01/19 06:29 PM
1

/eyeroll
/r/MensRights13/01/19 11:20 AM
1

It's basically impossible not to be able to get laid as a gay guy; gay incels are not a thing. Literally anyone can get on the apps and be balls deep in ass within an hour---a few at most. And if even that fails there's private glory holes in every city that all you need is a dick pic to get sucked. Gay incels... Jesus Christ. You probably don't even understand why that is such a ridiculous concept.
/r/MensRights13/01/19 05:55 AM
1

I'm gay you moron.
/r/MensRights13/01/19 05:40 AM
5

LOL
/r/MensRights12/01/19 03:19 PM
1

That you're an idiot that can't think himself out of a paper bag? I concur.
/r/MensRights11/01/19 03:05 AM
1

You've said nothing useful. Are you one of those idiots that believe brain-dead bodies have 'souls'? Care to reiterate?
/r/MensRights10/01/19 12:59 PM
1

Can you even rape a brain-dead body, legal standards aside? It's a non-person, non-sentient organism. It'd be easier to make a rational argument that forcefully inseminating cows is rape in my opinion. Human morality is weird.
/r/MensRights09/01/19 08:18 PM
13

No. Most r/MR posters are pretty left-leaning on most issues according to the last subreddit survey. Most of us are atheists, pro-gay etc. Party affiliation Political orientation
/r/MensRights09/01/19 04:04 PM
1

Hey dumbass not everyone here is a conservative.
/r/MensRights09/01/19 03:09 PM
1

People with money don't die of AIDS these days crazy boy. On the other hand if you continue on the path you're on I wouldn't be surprised if you end up killing yourself at some point in the near future.
/r/MensRights07/01/19 03:32 PM
1

All you had to do is eat some crow and admit your use of language was misleading/erroneous. Instead your paragraphs get longer and more deranged. If you wanted to argue that men are under more selective pressure than women that might have been an argument worth having but I don't think you're talking to at all. There's enough crazies on the internet as it is I'm not going to enable you. Step back from the computer, take your pills and go do something productive with your time. It's a beautiful w…
/r/MensRights07/01/19 03:21 PM
1

You belief that 'evolving faster' equates to 'more evolved' is yours alone yet you're trying to pretend that it's some kind of consensus. You're the equivalent of a conspiracy theory.
/r/MensRights07/01/19 02:31 PM
2

You said: This tends to reinforce the notion that men are more evolved than women. This is pseudoscientific nonsense. There's no such thing as 'more evolved'. What exactly does more evolved mean? Species that have managed to live the longest without going extinct; more genetically complex? More intelligent? More cosmopolitian? The most prolific? Spare me the rest of the bullshit and address egregiously erroneous terminology here. ​
/r/MensRights07/01/19 03:51 AM
3

There's no such thing as 'more evolved'; that's unscientific language. Evolution doesn't have an end-state; evolutionary pressures simply reshape organisms to better thrive in their particular niche. Or they go extinct.
/r/MensRights07/01/19 02:18 AM
1

My side already won. What else is left to say here? People like you are already pariahs.
/r/MensRights29/12/18 05:23 PM
1

What does trans suicide have to do with anything? There's many ways for gay people to have kids form surrogates to parenting plans with lesbians. Also, it's not possible for male-male couples to reproduce together yet. We're now in the early stages where sperm cells are being created through the manipulation of stem cells, which means lesbians can have each other's children . Progress on ectowombs and artificial eggs is ongoing as well which will allow two men to have children that share both th…
/r/MensRights29/12/18 02:22 PM
1

Gay people can and do reproduce asshat; in increasing numbers too. I wonder if you'll have a heart attack when gay couples start genetically engineering their children to also be gay. The future is going to be interesting for people like you. I hope there's mass suicides. What exactly do you hope to gain? Do you somehow expect the coming generations are going to go from embracing sexual minorities to putting them in concentration camps? There's a difference between being conservative and being s…
/r/MensRights27/12/18 11:10 PM
1

30+ percent have the odds similar to non treated patients, because they don't take their meds right. Can you quote the specific part of the article that states this? I can't find it. --- First you were defending patients with undetectable loads. Which makes sense because there's studies. But now you've gone full medical malpractice and are saying undetectable loads don't matter. You said: I don't know but there's a one in 3 chance that the person on meds isn't taking them correctly and has high …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 06:59 AM
2

Over 30 percent of patients aren't adherent. Which means they don't have adequate viral suppression. So with over 30% of ART treated patients, you're risking getting infected. So it could be 1 in 100, 1 in 500,000 or 1 in 1,000,000. You have no clue. I don't know but there's a one in 3 chance that the person on meds isn't taking them correctly and has high viral loads. Poor adherence doesn't necessarily lead to a 'high viral load'---you can have undetectable levels and 'technically undetectable'…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 06:30 AM
2

You made a positive claim about the risk of fucking an HIV positive woman with a condom; without knowing what the actual risk is when taking into account treatment, not to mention the effectiveness of condoms against vaginal transmission and the already low chance of transmission from PiV sex. Even now you refuse to answer to elaborate on the most basic facts required to defend your position. What is the risk of transmission? How many people are getting HIV from their partners on ART? How likely…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 06:17 AM
2

What numbers? What you posted does not answer my question. What is the risk of transmission? How many people are getting HIV from their partners on ART? How likely is it that you will contract HIV from a positive woman on ART if you bareback them? ​ ​
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 06:13 AM
2

In saying the people that aren't adherent likely don't have adequate suppression and ultimately putting partners at risk. What risk? What are the numbers? It's the same thing I asked you before. How many people are getting HIV from their partners on ART? How likely is it that you will contract HIV from a positive woman on ART if you bareback them?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 06:10 AM
2

Do you remember what your original argument was? You can't argue that ART is not an effective preventative measure against HIV transmission without actually knowing the relevant numbers. You're assuming that it happens often enough to justify your position that people on ART fail to maintain adherence and give people HIV but you don't actually know this. This is exactly the same unfounded concern people had about PrEP. Your statement about fucking HIV positive women with a condom is beyond neuro…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 05:51 AM
2

You're repeating yourself; the fact is you don't actually know the rate at which people on ART transmit HIV to their partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 05:36 AM
1

I don't have a magic number for you, sorry. I can tell you that if they're adherent, it's probably low as fuck. And if they're not, it's probably a lot higher. If you wanted me to spit out a magic number out of my asshole, I don't. I think we can fairly call this 'begging the question'. You're taking a random fact you supposedly heard while in school and building an argument around it while in reality you have no idea of what the real-world effects for people on ART and their partners actually a…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 05:28 AM
1

Well maybe you're not completely retarded. /golf clap ​
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 05:14 AM
2

Hate to break it to you but I'm an asshole and I have a big dick. No you don't. I can feel the waves of your inadequacy are giving me skin cancer as I write this. There is no magic effect. It's a simple concept Take drug, likely no disease. Miss drug, risk increases. [...] I'm not looking up studies at midnight but I didn't pull 95% adherence out of my ass. Please spare me I know more about the subject than you do. What is the effect on the rates of transmission in people currently on ART? ​
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 05:10 AM
3

Hate to break it to you but I'm an asshole and I have a big dick. Yeah, just like you're a "pharmacist". Let me guess, your girlfriend is a 10/10 too. Since you asked, as far as med school goes, I wasn't interested in touching nasty ass patients on any kind of regular basis. I've had internships with several PharmD MDs that admitted pharmacy school was harder. JD PharmDs say the same thing. Hah. Right. There is no magic effect. It's a simple concept Take drug, likely no disease. Miss drug, risk …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 05:07 AM
1

Morbidly obese gay men get laid a lot though.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 05:00 AM
-1

You can suck my dick. Sorry I have an 5+ inch rule. Put your sad little mushroom away. Jesus Christ, there's a reason I'm the pharmacist. Or so you say. You're a glorified barista and jobs for your qualifications are slowly being replaced by vending machines. Was med school just too hard? You're not the only person in the world with a postdoc, dumbass---my cock is bigger than yours. If your adherence isn't close to perfect, your viral loads will shoot up and your risk of transmission increases e…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 04:48 AM
-1

If I were your boss I'd send you in for mandatory re-training. I can't believe they have people like you actually working with at risk populations. Watch yourself or you're going to end up fired and ostracised if it ever comes out how much of a cunt you are. Did you somehow miss what I said? There has not been a single reported case of transmission among zerodiscordant couples where the positive partner partner had an undetectable viral load. Did you somehow miss the undetectable = untransmittab…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 04:23 AM
-2

You can't even transmit HIV if the positive partner is on medication. To date there hasn't been a single case of transmission among zerodiscordant couples where the positive partner had an undetectable viral load. You're ignorant; and if you're this ignorant about HIV I wouldn't be surprised you know fuck all about sexual health in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/18 04:07 AM
0

I don't understand your point. So you're saying that society should stigmatise homosexuality?
/r/MensRights24/12/18 10:29 PM
4

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cross-cultural-evidence-for-the-genetics-of-homosexuality/ While not a completely 'settled' issue in the sense that many questions remain, the body of work on the issue of homosexuality overwhelmingly points towards a mix of related and unrelated biological factors.
/r/MensRights24/12/18 07:26 PM
1

You can't make people gay dude.
/r/MensRights24/12/18 04:57 PM
-4

It's not a sex club though...
/r/MensRights24/12/18 04:56 PM
5

That's the dumbest thing I've heard today. Idiots like you are the ones that end up getting fucked over.
/r/MensRights01/12/18 12:25 PM
1

That's so besides the point of the discussion that I'm wondering why you'd even mention it. We're talking about culture here. I never claimed Europe was part of 'continental' Europe in the geographical sense. That said, islands in the same plate are considered to be part of that continent so the only thing you're 'right' about here is the irrelevant fact the British isles aren't part of the mainland---no fucking shit Sherlock, it's an archipelago.
/r/MensRights01/12/18 11:14 AM
2

That's what the British try and tell themselves so they can feel special. It's bullshit. The UK is European in every practical sense, including opposition to genital mutilation
/r/MensRights30/11/18 07:49 PM
3

Europeans hate circumcision it's not a gender politics issue for them.
/r/MensRights30/11/18 04:18 PM
4

That's not evidence, that's a claim. You use evidence to back up claims like that. You have a lot of opinions for someone that appears to be neither educated nor clever.
/r/MensRights23/11/18 02:54 PM
4

I'm making boys claims here, you are. You seem convinced that intactivist doesn't work, without zero supporting evidence.
/r/MensRights23/11/18 01:58 PM
2

Yes
/r/MensRights23/11/18 12:37 PM
4

You're literally pulling that out of your ass. So I'll follow suit: by far, without exception, the largest impact on the circumcision rate in the US, after dropping of medicaid coverage has been due to mothers speaking to other mothers in parenting forums and such. The bulk of the intactivist movement is made up mothers of intact sons, mothers of circumcised sons who regret their actions and the expectant mothers they've managed to convince. This is good because the average heterosexual man is b…
/r/MensRights23/11/18 02:01 AM
5

Ineffective by what metric, exactly? How do you gauge such a thing; even if it does absolutely nothing, which I doubt, the circumcision rate in the US is steadily dropping.
/r/MensRights23/11/18 01:54 AM
2

What's your point? That you don't care about the rights of males unless it's convenient/doesn't make you question why you're missing half the skin on your pee pee? Fuck off.
/r/MensRights08/11/18 07:50 PM
2

How you feel about your penis has zero relevance to whether non-therapeutic genital cutting of children is a human rights abuse.
/r/MensRights08/11/18 07:29 PM
2

Yes, you made that obvious. You're a poster child for the "But I love my cut dick!!!" tools.
/r/MensRights08/11/18 11:22 AM
1

That's like me saying that I don't have to care about guys getting fucked over by divorce, not being allowed to see their kids or being falsely accused of rape because as a gay dude none of that affects me.
/r/MensRights08/11/18 12:21 AM
1

What is there to debate, this is the MensRights subreddit; did you get lost somehow? If you're a tourist feel free to read the sidebar---if not, what exactly are you doing here?
/r/MensRights07/11/18 08:22 PM
2

That makes it worse, not better. Doing something of your own volition is preferable to being violated.
/r/MensRights07/11/18 07:23 PM
2

About a million American boys get their genitals mutilated every year. . .
/r/MensRights07/11/18 05:56 PM
3

That has nothing to do with anything. The reasons women might defer to more attractive women, or not, have nothing to do with sexual attraction. Also, everyone is positively disposed to attractive people. That applies to you as well, towards attractive men. It's calles the Halo Effect. The 'women are wonderful' effect is something else altogether and has nothing to do with sex.
/r/MensRights06/09/18 05:46 PM
-7

That only applies to straight men. Far from everyone
/r/MensRights06/09/18 11:23 AM
17

If oppression leaves you better off than the people that are oppressing you then the word is worthless.
/r/MensRights27/08/18 09:05 PM
9

Except it doesn't work like that; when darling groups such as women have that happen to them they whine and the government equalises it for them. A perfect example is how it's more expensive to care for the health of women but insurers are not allowed to charge them more. You're never going to get rid of that, either. It's easy to go on about how the world should be ideally---this is how it IS.
/r/MensRights28/07/18 10:37 PM
1

That's not a response to anything. Of course it is. It's an argument by example; the example shown being that for virtually every political hot-topic issue you can list the right and left are in opposition and these beliefs all tend to cluster together.
/r/MensRights21/07/18 12:55 AM
1

I'm as politically centrist as it gets---most everyone else is not.
/r/MensRights21/07/18 12:43 AM
1

Are pro gun rights people more likely to be left or right? Are pro choice people more likely to be left or right? Are anti-trans people more likely to be left or right? Are people trying to take down the ten commandments in front of a courthouse more likely to be left or right? Are climate change activists more likely to be left or right? Do I really need to keep going?
/r/MensRights21/07/18 12:41 AM
1

Nevertheless, a shitload of people act like there's only two sides and generally tend to pick their beliefs accordingly.
/r/MensRights21/07/18 12:39 AM
2

Are you serious? Most feminists are lefties, most anti-feminists are righties. Most anti-abortion people are righties, most pro-abortion people are lefties. etc. etc. Most people accept every single belief from their political tribe whole cloth.
/r/MensRights21/07/18 12:15 AM
2

Nevertheless it's a position associated with the right. Stop trying to whitewash it. There's nothing wrong with being on the right.
/r/MensRights21/07/18 12:02 AM
1

Yeah I'm slightly libertarian sympathizing myself but tend to prefer the status quo to drastic social changes, be they a potential implementation of libertarianism or socialist revolution.
/r/MensRights20/07/18 11:36 PM
1

That's what left-leaning means; you accept some traditional left positions and reject others. Otherwise it'd just be called... "left". Just look at the community survey for a breakdown of what r/MR members believe. If I remember correctly we're generally; atheist/non-religious, strongly believe in equality of opportunity, strongly pro-gay and disproportionately gay/bisexual, ambivalent on trans issues, social democrats of some stripe i.e. capitalism with strong safety nets, pro-choice on abortio…
/r/MensRights20/07/18 08:59 PM
6

Anti-feminism is a "right wing" position as are a lot of the issues that are discussed here. You shouldn't assume that makes the community members right wing. You know it's not required to accept every single left or right position just because you accept most of them, right?
/r/MensRights20/07/18 08:47 PM
14

You know most MRAs here are left-leaning, right?
/r/MensRights20/07/18 07:38 PM
1

but I thought they couldnt feel anything and were just clumps of cells? Foetuses are just a clump of cells with no moral value until an arbitrary point in their development. I personally don't know when they become capable of suffering but it's certainly not at conception. Babies can feel pain, but just like a cat their lack of capability for self-awareness makes their moral value less than a grown humans and should not be considered persons.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 08:52 PM
3

Whether it's life or not is irrelevant. You know what else is life? Pond scum. Or, you know, the pigs and cows you eat on a daily basis that are actually sentient beings capable of suffering.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 08:50 PM
5

They don't feel anything right? Are you a vegetarian? Pigs are smarter than dogs and certainly feel the torture they endure while being raised for slaughter in factory farms all over the world. I guarantee you that in the inconsistent mess that you call a moral standard that is not the metric that you actually use to determine whether a being should be hurt. The pain caused by genital mutilation is not the reason that it is unethical; modern medical practise is actually pretty damn good at makin…
/r/MensRights22/06/18 08:18 PM
3

Is that supposed to mean anything to me? Your emotional appeals do not sway me. By the way, I don't even believe newborns are persons per Peter Singer's argument. A parrot has more self-awareness, intelligence and capacity to understand the world than that baby.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 07:51 PM
2

Abortion is a net positive for society too. The argument for using taxes to pay for schooling applies just as easily.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 07:43 PM
1

You might think so. I don't see the difference. Both are services that my money might pay for but which I do not benefit from except at the societal level.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 07:24 PM
3

Abortion is great for society. The impact on criminality alone justifies it.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 07:23 PM
3

No, I do not see that. To me a foetus is just a collection of human cells with as much value as a tumor.
/r/MensRights22/06/18 07:23 PM
1

Why should I as a childless gay man pay taxes towards educating someone else's kids?
/r/MensRights22/06/18 05:41 PM
5

What, being considered worthless and expendable? That's already the case, so mission accomplished I guess?
/r/MensRights01/06/18 08:17 PM
5

They're the same.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 03:59 PM
6

It's exactly the same thing.
/r/MensRights01/06/18 03:57 PM
1

What's disgusting? How females are protected from genital mutilation but males are not?
/r/MensRights01/06/18 12:27 PM
2

Yeah, it agree it's probably too much to hope for that women will do their part.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 08:55 PM
2

I'm 29 years old. A lot will change in my lifetime; the foundation for the technologies that will allow it already exist. Who knows, maybe by then women will actually have started to pull their own weight.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 07:13 PM
2

Really, homophobia? As a gay dude I'd love to have a child that shares both my partner's genes and my own.
/r/MensRights22/05/18 06:14 PM
4

If you're going to point out how men do the majority of bad things in the world why should I not point out how they've also done the overwhelming majority of good things?
/r/MensRights22/05/18 06:12 PM
14

The sex that built human civilization and has done virtually everything important throughout history?
/r/MensRights22/05/18 03:25 PM
5

Are you kidding me with this shit? HIV these days is a perfectly treatable condition less dangerous then diabetes. The like expectancy of people living with HIV today is the same as non positive people. You basically take a pill a day and that's it.
/r/MensRights19/05/18 10:12 AM
5

These old cunts are like the hags and vampire right out of mythology; feasting on the flesh of children like Baba Yaga or bathing in the blood of virgins like Elizabeth Bathory. The rabbit hole just keeps getting deeper for me. I never cease to be surprised at how inherently hypocritical, amoral and twisted human civilisation can be. Nothing means anything, when stuff like this is something people can laugh about while shit like the "wage gap" is something leaders of countries actually talk abou…
/r/MensRights18/05/18 05:22 PM
8

That's a worthless law. No one but Jews and Muslims are mutilating children in Iceland anyway.
/r/MensRights13/05/18 09:08 PM
1

But 90% of sexual violence is not committed by men. Women are almost as likely to rape men as men are women.
/r/MensRights25/04/18 11:42 AM
1

Can you cite some relevant data?
/r/MensRights25/04/18 11:41 AM
1

There's the same amount of transphobia there's ever been. We don't censor comments.
/r/MensRights19/04/18 10:20 AM
9

Fuck off. Seriously, just fuck off out of here. You don't belong in this community. I'm so sick of men like you that are unable to emphatise with other men's pain. You're the primary reason for every single problem men face---not women, but men like you.
/r/MensRights09/04/18 04:02 AM
4

What about if you've got kids and she's hurting them to? What about if she threatens you with divorce and will take half your shit? Don't be an idiot.
/r/MensRights04/04/18 10:19 PM
2

This is stupid. You're stupid. It reminds me of when r/atheism used to be nothing but shitty memes. I don't want that to happen here.
/r/MensRights23/03/18 10:56 PM
2

Yes, because the religious are so nice. You know, with the honor killing, homophobia, genital mutilation, shunning (or worse) of apostates and the never ending as attempts to legislate their brand of dogma Just because atheists say mean things about you on the internet doesn't make them bad people. At the very least no worse than any other group.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 11:26 PM
4

Provocative clothes on women are always sexual but their intent might not be. Since a huge part of women's power is derived from their sexual appeal (and hypoagency) it's an obvious way for them to get what they want. Obviuously what they want, at least in the US, is rarely sex from men. In cultures like my own (Cuban) women use this power blatantly to manipulate men or less sinisterly just because it feels nice to be wanted. Cuban women not only tend to understand that being whistled at on the …
/r/MensRights12/03/18 11:18 PM
6

OK boys and girls count your diversity points. Gay, Hispanic atheist here. I'm a triple threat.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 10:56 PM
1

Sad. Enjoy your evening.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 10:48 PM
1

This is not about me. You don't know what my views are at all; you don't even know whether I know who this guy is. This is about your responsability as the submitter of a top level post.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 07:24 PM
1

A valuable contribution would have, succintly, summed up you your argument against this man's views. Specially because you were the only one offering a dissenting opinion. For all practical purposes your comment might as well not been there.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 06:27 PM
4

I just did. There are entire traditional cultures where sex with children is normalised.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 05:56 PM
1

We're talking about different things. Not science as an institution but the scientific method as an idea.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 02:00 PM
2

What does this post contribute to this community?
/r/MensRights12/03/18 12:20 PM
0

Exactly. Conservstives claim it in the present, though it was not achieved by conservstives at the time; conservstive and progressive are relative terms. Roughly, "conservatives" can be defined as the people that, when presented with a nifty new idea by progressives, such as Communism or the scientific method, say "no". Also, personal attacks are counterproductive. There's no need to act like a child.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 11:46 AM
3

So what? I reiterate: there's been as much of a push from the right to make paedophilia acceptable as there's been from the left, which is in actuality very little. But that's only if you limit your scope to certain Western countries. From a global perspective you have societies wanting to maintain their child exploiting traditions and progressives that think they should change. It's not conservative trying to stop child marriages in Pakistan or Afghanistan. Of course, that comes with the double…
/r/MensRights12/03/18 10:20 AM
4

Sigh. How large was this "large" of push? Larger than say, child marriages among ultra-conservative Mormons in the US and other fringe right groups? I always find it amazing that people actually believe every single bad thing in the world is attributed to their political enemies while every good one is thw result of those that share their own beliefs. I blame democracy.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 10:14 AM
1

That makes no sense.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 10:10 AM
1

I'd you're going to attribute every failed new idea to progressivism, which is fair, then you should also attibute them every successful one. Like the scientific method and every single one of its thousands of advances that have made the world today the best our species has ever seen.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 10:09 AM
1

What's acceptable to think becomes acceptable to say, do and eventually becomes commonplace or even mandatory. That's how the conservstives are always drawing pointless lines in the sand that the unstoppable tide of progressivism erases time and time again. Unintelligent posters above cite communism as an obvious failure of the left. Though interestingly none of them could come up with even a handful more because in actuality there aren't that many compared to the long, long list of victories. T…
/r/MensRights12/03/18 03:50 AM
1

Sigh. Google the term Overton Window. Also, Google Mencius Moldbugg.
/r/MensRights12/03/18 12:48 AM
0

Ultimately. Over time, generally etc. As I asked someone above, have you heard of the term Overton Window?
/r/MensRights12/03/18 12:47 AM
0

Ask better questions. Can you explain why we don't live in a Communist society please? Not in such a limited space but a single outlier, if it can be called so makes no difference. http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/01/gentle-introduction-to-unqualified.html Or why paedophiles aren't a protected group? There is as much push from the left to accept paedophilia as there is from the right, which means very little. The left has got the sexual freedom angle while the right has got reli…
/r/MensRights11/03/18 08:15 PM
1

Have you ever heard of a concept called the "Overton Window"? "Cthulhu may swim slowly. But he only swims left."
/r/MensRights11/03/18 08:12 PM
-2

That's not a refutation. Are you asserting that conservative beliefs tend to triumph on culture wars?
/r/MensRights11/03/18 05:59 PM
-10

You ARE aware that left ideals always win in the end, right? It's one of the basic premises of the neoreactionary movement i.e. the real alt right. You should be less amused.
/r/MensRights11/03/18 03:44 PM
2

Knowing why they do it doesn't make it less palatable.
/r/MensRights09/03/18 10:54 PM
4

Having foreigners literally buy your country from under your feet is fucking terrifying, specially if they're from some culturally backwards shithole.
/r/MensRights09/03/18 08:21 PM
4

It's relatively easy for a baby to bleed to death; they don't have much blood to begin with. Also, they don't produce a vitamin (K) key to coagulation until a week or so after being born.
/r/MensRights08/03/18 08:39 PM
2

It's not difficult. Rent a house with a few of your mates and suddenly you have some disposable income even if you don't make six figures.
/r/MensRights03/03/18 06:28 PM
2

They're also optional. The overwhelming majority of sex between men is oral. Anal sex takes a lot of prep, not something you can usually do with spontaneity
/r/MensRights03/03/18 12:20 AM
3

You're not addressing my arguments.
/r/MensRights01/03/18 08:34 PM
3

Can you clarify your statement? You explicitly said that for someone to qualify as a victim they must have knowledge of how they were victimised.
/r/MensRights01/03/18 07:39 PM
3

You're being irrational, not unreasonable. There's a difference. What's your definition of physical harm that can logically apply to female circumcision but not male? Also, is rape that leaves no physical sequels OR that you have no recollection of OK? Please address my actual questions/aruments.
/r/MensRights01/03/18 07:35 PM
3

You do know that female genital mutilation is perpetrated mainly by mutilated women, right? Also, by your reasoning I could drug you, fuck you up the ass and you wouldnt be a rape victim either. If you're going to appeal to reason at least try to use your brain.
/r/MensRights01/03/18 07:11 PM
8

TRP people hate us and vehemently claim not to be MRAs while MRAs are the complete opposite of TRPs and more closely align with MGTOWs on that sphere. Just because I agree with Hitler that the sky is blue does not make me a Nazi. The ideological overlap between MRAs and TRPs is actually not that big---we basically some beliefs on society that are common throughout many socially conservative groups too.
/r/MensRights28/02/18 07:53 PM
10

TRP is not a men's right community. Why should it be mentioned?
/r/MensRights28/02/18 07:12 PM
3

This is one of the saddest thing I've ever read. Human civilisation is doomed.
/r/MensRights27/02/18 05:25 PM
1

Platitudes. The most "traditional" and conservative demographics are still wracked by divorce. Conservative Christians in the US have some of the highest divorce rates, while atheists have some of the lowest. Your arguments have no legs.
/r/MensRights27/02/18 09:21 AM
1

Society? How about cause and effect? If a straight man gets married today he opens himself up to a dozen of common things that can either destroy his life or make it extremely unpleasant. It's simply not worth it. Besides, that doesn't even make sense. Marriage remains a socially endorsed institution. Those that reject it still face social scrutiny or even disdain for it.
/r/MensRights27/02/18 05:47 AM
1

The reasons are irrelevant---whatever they are, they won't protect you from the myriad of unpleasant outcomes.
/r/MensRights27/02/18 05:16 AM
2

That has nothing to do with anything; a man's value as a human being is not dependent on what he can provide for society. (e.g. wealth, offspring, labour) The fact of the matter is that under the current social and legal climate straight men are playing Russian roulette every time they get married. If you think otherwise then you haven't been involved in men's rights activism long enough and should look at the sidebar for the states on divorce and how the courts, specially family courts, treat m…
/r/MensRights27/02/18 03:17 AM
2

You should listen to what I have to say because I have no personal investment in it. My opinion is as impartial as you're likely to find.
/r/MensRights27/02/18 01:54 AM
3

//eyeroll If your culture demands genital mutilation then your culture is evil and needs to evolve---or die. Appeals to Nazi don't move me.
/r/MensRights26/02/18 07:56 PM
3

Without the identity the Jews would have ceased existing a long time ago like a zillion other extinct peoples. So what? Empires fall, cultures die out, languages fade. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as it's being replaced with something equally valuable or more so.
/r/MensRights26/02/18 05:53 PM
3

Found the baby boomer. If you could please go ahead and die so young people can get nice jobs that'd be nice.
/r/MensRights26/02/18 05:50 PM
3

Actually, I have a long-term partner. I'm not a straight man, however. Also, did r/MensRights become pro-marriage when I wasn't looking? Because one of the most commonly given bits of advice repeated on this sub is to not get fucking married. Marriage is bad for me; one of the worst choices a guy could make. Did all the MGTOW guys here get replaced by... whatever the hell you are?
/r/MensRights26/02/18 05:48 PM
5

Single parent homes are bad, regardless of the sex of the parents. But single mother families are worse than single father families.
/r/MensRights26/02/18 05:47 PM
–

If you're psychic, I guess. Even stupid people don't marry obviously bad partners. It turns out, interestingly enough, that people lie or they change etc. Only a very stupid straight man gets married in today's culture. But if you like playing Russian roulette with your life sure, go ahead.
/r/MensRights26/02/18 03:14 PM
2

There's a huge difference between saying "no, thanks" and just screaming rape You'd think such a simple concept would be easier to grasp
/r/MensRights20/02/18 11:45 AM
0

Lawl
/r/MensRights20/02/18 11:44 AM
2

Yeah generalisations are just that. There are always exceptions. But the inherent sexual and social dynamic between two men are different from those of men and women, because men and women are not the same.
/r/MensRights20/02/18 11:43 AM
1

No idea. There are so few out bi guys among people older than 30 that if I ever met one in a gay space I probably assumed he was gay. Bisexual guys of the older generations basically all married women and didn't really take part in gay culture aside from fucking around behind the missus now and then. It's different with young kids these days but they're outside of my social circle.
/r/MensRights20/02/18 11:41 AM
2

Yes, pool parties. You're personalising this; why would anyone grope you at a gay nude pool party? Sexual touching happens at every gate bathouse I've ever been to in the entire world. It's completely normalised. Are you actually surprised by this or are you really this sheltered? Jesus fuck am I talking to school kids here? Have you BEEN to any gay sex on premises locale? Also, have I at ANY point said I grope random people? I reserve that kind of familiarity to friends and guys I've had sex wi…
/r/MensRights20/02/18 01:17 AM
1

Do you apply this logic for women who said, and meant, "No" when having sex? That's an explicit rebuff. You do see the difference, right? No I don't have too and there's not a damn thing you can do about it buddy. As if that matters for anything; when was the last time you went to gay bathouse or pool party? You don't have a problem with unwanted groping, treating consent as implicit, then you're a sicko pervert who gives decent gay people a bad name. My my... "pervet", "sicko", "decent". LOL
/r/MensRights19/02/18 11:29 PM
1

Consent is implicit. If you want to hang out in our spaces you have to deal with the ocasional sack-check without crying like a bitch. Otherwise there are certainly gay safe spaces where that's not acceptable. I hear they've got cosmos. Not a favorable argument in support of gays. I don't need your acceptance; refrain from murdering ortorturing my kind or using your power to legally oppress me and we'll call it a day. Although there are definitely straight people out there that actually do "get …
/r/MensRights19/02/18 10:01 PM
0

I'm not arguing anything. I'm simply explaining how things work to a bunch of straight people (and I guess some sheltered gay dudes) that have no idea how certain gay subcultures work I started going to the bathhouses I my early 20s, where you can't walk 20 feet without someone sticking their fingers in your ass or grabbing your dick. This is 100% standard behaviour in that environment so many of us that are used to similar environment having a guy reach down to see what you're packing is just n…
/r/MensRights19/02/18 07:50 PM
-1

That's hilarious because I'm usually the one getting groped. Why attempt to understand when someone is trying to explain another culture to you, when you can just straw man the shit out of them and screech insults. Does that sound familiar to you? You're basically acting like a feminist. There are billions of people in the world with different values than yours. Grow the fuck up. Or better yet, visit your local gay bathhouse and take that stick out of your asshole.
/r/MensRights19/02/18 07:44 PM
2

I had no idea. Maybe I should put it on my travel list. I did visit Tel Aviv though. Israeli guys know how to party too!
/r/MensRights19/02/18 06:02 PM
-19

Actually I don't tell women anything because I live in the gay ghetto and work in an all male environment. Only woman I have regular contact with is my mother. In the subcultures I associate with (leather, kink, bear) sexual touching (in certain contexts) is both common and not a huge deal. Even when unwanted guys will not turn themselves into victims. I get felt up by older men I'm not necessarily attracted to at parties downtimes. It's not a fucking big deal. It happens at the bath house and s…
/r/MensRights19/02/18 05:21 PM
2

I did. explicitly. Go back and re-read my post.
/r/MensRights19/02/18 05:17 PM
3

Yup. You get it. So many young gay guys bought into the bullshit that "we're just like straight people". We're human and deserve human rights but we're not the same. Which is why so many kids here on Reddit are shocked when I tell them that 50% of gay guys are or have been in an open relationship. And that number is growing.
/r/MensRights19/02/18 05:17 PM
-4

It depends heavily on your age group and subculture. The Reddit gay community is in no way indicative of mainstream gay culture and specially not when it comes to specific subcultures. Like the rest of Reddit it trends towards very young, socially awkward and neurotic. In fact, I wouldnt be surprised if I'm the oldest guy commenting here. I live in the second gayest city in the US after P-Town (Wilton Manors, Florida) and I've got my finger on the pulse of gay culture. I actually know what I'm t…
/r/MensRights19/02/18 05:14 PM
-4

How old are you and what gay subculture do you associate with?
/r/MensRights19/02/18 04:53 PM
14

Feminism is evil. Why shouldn't we bash it?
/r/MensRights19/02/18 04:47 PM
-28

If you don't want to get your cock grabbed don't go to gay clubs. Stop trying to feminise our spaces, thank you---the answer to overinflated female whining should not be to adopt the same victim mentality. Or you can just go ahead and post a message on Twitter about your horrific rape. #MeToo Oh my god, you poor baby! You got knocked off a bar stool! That's so much worse than then fist fights and rolling around in the ground I've seen at straight bars.
/r/MensRights19/02/18 04:45 PM
-20

I'm gay and I don't want straight people in gay clubs, for multiple reasons. Straight guys fight each other and act out impress women. There's basically zero violence I gay clubs otherwise In some gay subcultures behaviour that's considered "sexual harassment" in the straight world is perfectly acceptable. I don't want straight men getting insulted or violent if they get hit on or felt up I don't want to navigate through a sea of straight guys to find someone to suck my cock. That's baically the…
/r/MensRights19/02/18 03:48 PM
2

Yes.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 08:08 PM
7

Oh look, transparently homophobic insult. Why am I not surprised. What do you think is is, r/The_Donald? You have no standing to tell anyone to leave this communit
/r/MensRights10/02/18 01:42 PM
6

Whatever McCarthy. Get a fucking hobby.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 01:00 PM
11

I genwrally don't stalk people's comment history. I don't care what else he's said.
/r/MensRights10/02/18 12:46 PM
1

People opebly wish death and horrific torture on male paedophiles and statutory rapists allá the time. Does it make you more uncomfortable that such hatred and violence is being directed at a woman?
/r/MensRights10/02/18 11:37 AM
2

You got caught in the other poster's downvote train I think.
/r/MensRights09/02/18 08:34 PM
20

Spain, Japan, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, South Korea and most of Eastern Europe are the worst but even the US has below replacement level fertility, if not negative population growth. In some countries this is offset by immigration but that comes with its own set of social problems.
/r/MensRights09/02/18 04:08 PM
16

Actually most developed countries are currently headed towards demographic collapse due to low female fertility.
/r/MensRights09/02/18 03:53 PM
1

Once again, just-so story, begging the question, citation needed etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/18 06:07 PM
1

That sounds like a big, honking begging the question to me...
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/18 05:56 PM
9

All you're saying is that women are high maintenance time/attention black holes with overinflated expectations due to their grrater biological value and straight men's being pussy/attention starved to the point they debase themselves for women. Cause as a gay guy it's trivially easy to get sex with someone in your league, compare to all the fucking bullshit straight men put up with. If I was hetero I'd fucking chemically castrate myself.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/18 05:46 PM
4

As a gay man most if the shit you care a iut doesn't personally affect me, so why should I care about your rights? For me life is just getting sweeter. You either believe all human rights are worth defending or you can fuck off. Ignorant, self-involved twats are more of a liability than contributors.
/r/MensRights06/02/18 11:32 AM
1

Lawl
/r/MensRights01/02/18 11:02 PM
3

There's no such thing as karma. Evil people get away with it all the time. It is up to us to deal with injustice because the universe is completely apathetic to our suffering.
/r/MensRights01/02/18 01:49 PM
1

Women in the West are either equal or privilged in most spheres of society
/r/MensRights28/01/18 05:09 PM
1

Yeah, I really feel Trump's got my back. /sarcasm
/r/MensRights28/01/18 11:43 AM
2

Pick up artist.
/r/MensRights27/01/18 12:13 PM
1

There's a much bigger subsection of the straight male community (both in percentage and total numbers) that goes after straight women who want nothing to do with them because they're low status, not handsome enough etc. There are entire online communities dedicated to this. It's called PuA. Men are horny fucks, gay or straight. Unless you're talking about out and out rape, these straight men are not blushing victims, not even if they are drunk or the gay guys are in a position of power. Consent …
/r/MensRights27/01/18 11:28 AM
15

Just because a man fucks someone less powerful than then doesn't make it rape. Jesus, women are not children .
/r/MensRights22/01/18 05:38 PM
6

Fuck your religion; I hope it either changes for the better or goes extinct and my descendants get to hear about what monsters you were in history books.
/r/MensRights16/01/18 03:06 AM
2

Hanny Ligh in tfoot Klein is one of the world's top authorities on female genital cutting. Calling her "biased" in favour of my side is dishonest and ignorant. She's spent years in these countries talking to the women. What authorities are you citing, exactly? American or European. Because European authorities, based on the exact same evidence came to the opposite conclusion as the AAP on male circumcision. Imagine that, cultures that practise genital mutilation come up with spurious claims to j…
/r/MensRights12/01/18 05:29 PM
3

Have you ever actually heard first hand the reasons why mother's cut their daughters or are you just getting your opinions from westernized narratives? They're baically the same; hygiene, aesthetics, "no man will want an uncut woman". They're a perfect mirror of American attitudes towards intact men. http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.html
/r/MensRights12/01/18 04:48 PM
2

Intent is irrelevant. It's the least important aspect of the discussion. How about instead looking at harm, prevelance etc? Feminists and gynocebtrists love to focus on intent to avoid dealing with the real factors
/r/MensRights12/01/18 03:39 PM
7

That's not a rebuttal.
/r/MensRights12/01/18 02:53 PM
4

You don't know what you're talking about. Considering that genital cutting has been written and talked about extensively by MRAs I'm curious about how long you've been involved in the community.
/r/MensRights12/01/18 01:52 PM
13

Female genital cutting is not worse than male genital cutting. In many instsnces it's a lot less severe. Stop buying into the female supremacist bullshit and do some research.
/r/MensRights12/01/18 01:48 PM
8

Female circumcision is not worse than male circumcision. In fact, it's often a lot less invasive or damaging.
/r/MensRights12/01/18 01:45 PM
1

I didn't call you anything.
/r/MensRights09/01/18 04:06 PM
1

Saying all women aren't happy isn't a generalisation, it's an absolutism. Saying women are unhappy is a generalization, and also true. Modern women are miserable and getting more so. Buuuut. My original point had NOTHING to do with women's happiness. Like, I didn't even mention the word. You did.
/r/MensRights09/01/18 03:23 PM
1

There's nothing wrong with generalisation. If you're the kind of person that's insane/spiteful enough to assume that I literally mean ALL women chances are that I have no interest in anything you have to say anyway.
/r/MensRights09/01/18 03:12 PM
1

I never said "all women", I said women.
/r/MensRights08/01/18 04:49 PM
2

You've missed my point three times so far. Either I'm failing too be clear or you're trying hard not to get it. It's not about women being happy or not. It's about the fact that straight men have to work a hundred times harder to get female attention. ( because women aren't as horny, more biologically valuable whatever) This universal imbalance in power has repercussions at every level of social interaction between men and women and shapes the way our society works i.e. men getting ignored or fu…
/r/MensRights08/01/18 03:32 PM
1

It's not about neediness. Men are more sexually and socially compatible with each other than with women. There's a HUGE imbalance in the sexual value of men compared to women because women don't want men as much as men want them. It's a recipe for men getting screwed over.
/r/MensRights08/01/18 01:25 PM
1

I don't think there's any biological differences between gay and straight men, aside from the obvious. What makes straight and gay men's lives so different is that one group has to deal with women and the other one does not.
/r/MensRights08/01/18 11:16 AM
3

Looking at the lives of my straight high school friends most of them either live in quiet misery, are getting divorced or or have been divorced, have been alienated from their kids, have had kids they didn't want, are paying child support etc. Being gay comes with its own share of issues but personally I'm very fucking glad to be gay. In comparison my life is like an extended adolescence, free of crippling responsibility or social expectation. I get to do what I want, have fun and keep my own mo…
/r/MensRights07/01/18 11:53 PM
-1

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/the-key-to-a-happy-relationship-be-gay-or-childless-or-make-tea-9057349.html
/r/MensRights07/01/18 10:43 PM
1

Whatever. I have better things to do.
/r/MensRights07/01/18 10:36 PM
1

I think you're lying through your fucking teeth.
/r/MensRights07/01/18 09:54 PM
1

So I call you a conspiracy theorist and your answer is to call me a conspiracy theorist. Trump's s school of debate.
/r/MensRights07/01/18 07:01 PM
1

Tell me, what's your degree on? I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
/r/MensRights07/01/18 07:01 PM
1

And your post is worthless. Fuck off
/r/MensRights07/01/18 02:10 PM
1

Dysgenic pressures are completely and utterly irrelevant. Yo couldn't have picked a less useful example as we are less than a decade or two away from technologies like CRISPR being used on human embryos.
/r/MensRights07/01/18 02:10 PM
1

Ah, you're a conspiracy theorist. Should have realised. Have a good day.
/r/MensRights06/01/18 11:10 AM
2

And if men decide to chill rather than advance, that's a real problem The men that drive technological progress are already midling to low status and they rarely get a lot of female attention---they are used to being shit on by women. I don't think there's anything about feminism that will make geeks and scientists stop pursuing their passions and obsessions. They may even decide to overthrow the whole social order. Sure. Jesus could come back tomorrow. But how likely is it? The pressures requir…
/r/MensRights06/01/18 01:08 AM
1

Western society is not about to collapse any time soon. By the end of the century all social and biological factors affecting us now will be irrelevant---replaced by a while other set of issues. I don't necessarily disagree that given enough time we'd be outcompeted (though technologically superior minorities have subjugated huge majorities throughout human history) but our technology is advancing too fast for any of that to matter.
/r/MensRights06/01/18 12:55 AM
2

Oh, the chances of something going wrong are much, much higher than the chances of everything working out. It's still the only viable path. As I was just telling someone else: 99.99% of all species that have exer existed are extinct. Without continuous technological advancement that's us. We're due to some kind of cataclysm; whether it be a GRB, meteor impact or supervolcano. Our only hope, and the only hope of the entire genetic legacy of our planet, is to spread out through the galaxy. Without…
/r/MensRights06/01/18 12:06 AM
1

I think the whole concept that sex toys or robots are replacing either gender is wrong to at least some degree. While doing research for a college paper I found a that study that concluded that people who work to satisfy their partners rather than themselves when having sex are overall happier with their sex lives. Making sacrifices for your partner to make them feel good is what makes most people feel good. This self serving stuff may in fact be making all of you less satisfied. What was the di…
/r/MensRights06/01/18 12:03 AM
4

It's easier to change biology than it is to change society---or at least it will be within my lifetime. All we have to do to completely take away women's social power over men is to discover a means to allow men the choice to become bisexual. At the moment women couldn't hope to compete with men in terms of sexual desire and common interests; the only thing that gives them so much power is that straight men have no other choice. The most beautiful thing about this is that I don't think this woul…
/r/MensRights06/01/18 12:00 AM
2

This is one of the images that trans-humanists use to justify the idea of eliminating predation in nature. As a transhumanist, I'm giddy to see someone mention abolitionism in a r/MensRights thread of all places.
/r/MensRights05/01/18 11:53 PM
5

ee4m = downvote
/r/MensRights04/01/18 10:00 PM
-1

You're a fucking moron.
/r/MensRights14/12/17 05:31 AM
2

What I find most interesting is how she gets a pass for the "women are better than men at everything line". What exactly are they better at; because as far as I know that's a very short list
/r/MensRights02/12/17 03:26 PM
12

So, women are the primary victims of male suicide? You and Hillary Clinton would get along well. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights02/12/17 02:51 PM
1

Why raise new kids in a world where so many kids go unwanted? For one, they're usually unwanted for a reason. Adopting as a gay couple is not easy; we usually only get access to the kids heterosexual couples don't want i.e. children with behavioural or health issues, older kids, minority kids etc. If you've got the money surrogacy is a lot easier, specially if you go through the step to protect yourself. But the actual reason I agreed to surrogacy is simply that I want a kid that shares some of …
/r/MensRights11/11/17 02:49 AM
1

There's this thing called science. And it's got all these branches such as neurology and evolutionary biology, genetics etc. You're like a freaking young earth creationist. Sad.
/r/MensRights11/11/17 12:34 AM
1

Actually, me and my partner are in the process of surrogacy. And I'm not knocking you for anything, you are the one that asked whether your choice not to have kids (gay men can sire children as well as straight ones) was contributing to the problem. The answer is obviously yes.
/r/MensRights11/11/17 12:32 AM
1

No you can't. We have a concept of self and can recognise ourselves as distinct entities. Most animals can't even recognise themselves in a mirror. Also, we constantly foil our evolutionary programming. We have an internal narrative
/r/MensRights11/11/17 12:17 AM
1

They don't understand that their existence is fragile and they are prone to dying? No, they don't. Insects don't understand anything. They are automatons that function wholly and completely in response to their environment or based on hard-wired instincts and drives. I know through my experience (with things like LSD, DMT, and years of meditation) that all animals are conscious and consciousness is not a product of the physical brain. Oh god. You're one of those people. Never mind, this conversa…
/r/MensRights11/11/17 12:16 AM
1

Natural selection. Those that didn't move away from noxious stimuli were less likely to survive to reproduce---its a completely automated response. Even bacteria, who have no nervous system at all will attempt to avoid noxious stimuli. You seriously need to actually Wikipedia self-awareness and theory of mind. Your idea of what these things represent are way off base.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 11:38 PM
1

It certainly doesn't help, but there's not enough of us to make that much of a difference.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 11:33 PM
1

You can't replace a Japanese geneticist or artificial intelligence developer with a dozen illiterate Africans. The countries with above replacement fertility are generally extremely poor while some of the most educated and productive have fertility rates well below the 2.1 children per woman required just to maintain current numbers. That means more and more useless old people being supported by the taxes of an ever-shrinking working age group.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 10:32 PM
5

That's irrelevant to the conversation at hand. No MRA is against elective adult circumcision.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 10:27 PM
1

What did you think the demographic collapse occurring in most developed countries is, exactly? Dog worship is more of a symptom of this social suicide but it itself will push us further into dysfunction. People that honestly believe that the apparent adoration (dogs are social parasites that will do anything to get what they want from you) from an animal is a valid replacement for inter-human relationships are contributing to the problem even as they have been created by it, via social isolation…
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:59 PM
1

Yes, and that's fucked up and sick.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:49 PM
1

Even ants have a concept of self [...] No they don't. Look up self-awareness and theory of mind. Even human babies aren't born wholly self-aware and it takes the months to develop ToM.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:46 PM
1

Welcome to life,where we all have different interests And some of them are harmful to society or others and should be discouraged, policed or repressed. Regardless of your values system and ultimate goal, not all points of view are going to be equally valid. Mine mostly don't involve people and I like it that way. Then you're part of the disease that's killing our societies (not unlike feminism) and if your point of view continues to gain ground we're going to be outcompeted either by more human…
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:41 PM
3

when the fuck did he dictate someone elses human rights? I'll start off by saying that I'm not against circumcision as a practice. settle the fuck down. he just said his personal opinion on something you disagree with Last I checked, this is the MensRights subreddit. I don't have to respect his opinion, specially when it goes against the platform of this movement.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 07:33 PM
12

You're being a self-centered prick. Just because it "hasn't affected you" (how would you know?) is irrelevant here. The human rights of others should not be dictated by your personal feelings.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 12:50 PM
1

They barely have a concept of self; probably not at all, actually.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 11:40 AM
1

If you don't value human life more than the life of other animals your values system is dysfunctional. As to "innocence", the real reason we care more about children is purely evolution driven, there's nothing rational about it.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 11:39 AM
1

OK, does this sound better: it's a stupid, vaguely-if-at-all self-aware sack of flesh driven by instinct and not much else. To value a (literally) stupid creature over another self-aware, intelligent being is utterly perverse and yet another sign of the rot that is devouring Western civilisation.
/r/MensRights10/11/17 03:17 AM
6

That's fucked up; it's just an animal.
/r/MensRights09/11/17 11:00 PM
10

Haha. It's pathetic how you think "getting laid" is a sign of status and don't even understand that it's basically an admittance of the fact that women are the gatekeepers of sex. As a gay dude, I literally get all the cock I can possibly want so it's hardly a great achievement.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 03:09 AM
8

Your example is not accurate though. The overwhelming majority of severe and fatal dog attacks are committed by just two breeds: pitbulls and rottweilers. The size of the dog is irrelevant.
/r/MensRights08/11/17 03:05 AM
11

And when her kids grow up and cut someone's head off in the streets lefties will be hand-wringing about the poor oppressed Muslims being stereotyped and the right will have more ammunition to pass asinine laws.
/r/MensRights07/11/17 09:14 PM
4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_Anti-Homosexuality_Act,_2014
/r/MensRights23/10/17 08:48 PM
6

no Christians believe in those things... Are you shitting me? Have you heard of Jamaica? Christian sub-Saharan Africa. You're a fucking hypocrite. Islam might be one of the worst religions around but Christianity is not blameless. It's a shit belief system and the world would be better without it.
/r/MensRights23/10/17 08:31 PM
3

What a fucking cunt. His body, his choice? Nah, of course not.
/r/MensRights20/10/17 11:16 PM
1

When men give up on women, women are the biggest losers. Women need men do much more than men need women.
/r/MensRights20/10/17 10:57 PM
1

Both men and women want companionship and intimacy, but ultimately women want different things from a partner than men do. It's a lot easier to satisfy men needs than women via robotics and virtual reality. These can't give women wealth or status.
/r/MensRights18/10/17 06:58 PM
1

I'm saving this one. Next time some feminist whines about how much more horrible female circumcision is I'll show her this and tell her that if Egyptian women want to have clits they shouldn't be such whores.
/r/MensRights18/10/17 06:55 PM
1

Don't be such a drama queen.
/r/MensRights08/10/17 01:57 PM
4

That's not what I'm commenting on. No sane MRA would be caught dead talking to a self-described feminist without cameras. That's a recipe for false accusations.
/r/MensRights08/10/17 12:02 PM
3

We only really been keeping stats like that since the mid of the 20th century, so we can't know the happiness levels of the generations before that, unless you ask people who were alive then and unfortunately they are falling to the ravages of time and old age We have stats on happiness from other traditionalist societies too... Tell me, do you know why Japanese men are so miserable? It's not because of feminism. Who will carrying the burden if the world if not us men? Certainly not me. You feel…
/r/MensRights07/10/17 10:11 PM
3

Divorces only spiked in the 70s and 80s when it was made easier, after that the divorce rate declined rapidly [...] No it didn't, marriages as a whole sharply declined which meant that only the most omitted people (less likely to get divorced) got married in the first place. I explicitly said this above for fuck's sake's. Also that doesn't refute my point about the study you reeferred to being flawed since one of those groups were recently screwed over. When a huge percentage of marriages end in…
/r/MensRights07/10/17 09:05 PM
3

As a Christian [...] You do know that most of us here are atheist/non-religious right? Hell, I'm a gay guy happily married to another man. I think you made a wrong turn somewhere because the MRM doesn't want what you're selling; we dislike traditionalists as much as feminists. MRAs don't want to go back to a past where men were responsible for women and slaves to society; there's a reason why modern men are getting happier even as women become more miserable---turns out having the weight of the …
/r/MensRights07/10/17 08:53 PM
6

If you are comparing aganist divorced men then of course single guys will be happier You're ignoring the fact that marriage is Russian roulette with three loaded chambers for men. How many marriages today end in divorce again? And before you even quote stats that show the divorce rate going down, those don't account for the the decline of marriages as a whole.
/r/MensRights07/10/17 08:41 PM
5

If they can't perform the same duties as men they should not have the same rights. Simple as that. Why should men die for women's safety and get nothing in return?
/r/MensRights07/10/17 08:36 PM
5

If I can just make my point and just shut the fuck up, I just think that we need to deliberately and even painfully interact face to face. Without cameras. Offline Are you serious?
/r/MensRights07/10/17 08:33 PM
1

Why would you play Russian roulette with three chambers loaded?
/r/MensRights05/10/17 03:50 PM
4

Someone needs a spanking.
/r/MensRights03/10/17 02:23 PM
7

Let's give people a choice. Except those whose genitals are being mutilated, you mean? Bodily integrity is ah human right.
/r/MensRights30/09/17 05:19 PM
3

Most people, even those that care about this subject, aren't aware that there were several Jewish doctors involved in the AAP's infamous circumcision taskforce opinion.
/r/MensRights30/09/17 05:17 PM
10

This is posturing. By putting down low status males you consciously or subconsciously are attempting to make yourself look better in comparison to them and they hope to seem like a fitter mate. You should stop putting women on a pedestal and throwing other men, specially harmless, socially alianated men under the bus for the sake of pussy.
/r/MensRights29/09/17 05:30 PM
12

This is the face of the pervasive attitude we're up against. Remember a man doesn't have any inherently worth---his only value is from the utility he can provide others.
/r/MensRights26/09/17 05:55 PM
3

No one will care. Male lives are less than worthless to both men AND women unless they're being useful.
/r/MensRights22/09/17 10:37 AM
1

I'm really sorry to hear that. Who was it?
/r/MensRights22/09/17 08:58 AM
1

You won't have that experience at r/intactivists and it's the same crowed anyway.
/r/MensRights22/09/17 12:36 AM
2

Bad bot.
/r/MensRights14/09/17 12:15 AM
2

Everyone involved in that thread is human garbage and the human race would be better off if they were all tossed into a sinkhole. Jesus on a stick.
/r/MensRights13/09/17 11:44 PM
2

For once, it's yet a other example of how a supposedly patriarchal society actually used men's suffering to benefit women. One of the most powerful myths of feminism is the meme that women were singularly or particularly oppressed in traditional societies.
/r/MensRights12/09/17 11:54 PM
10

But maybe we should focus on more glaring issues for now and try to move ahead slowly and reasonably. Glaring to who? Sounds to me like you're saying: "focus on things I care about/affect me negatively". Well, as a gay man I have very little to worry about divorce, female on male rape, family court etc. Why should I care about issues that you think are important? The answer to that is simple: I have empathy for the suffering of others and I care deeply about every violation of the rights of men.…
/r/MensRights10/09/17 03:37 AM
1

How you feel about your penis is irrelevant; whether you're in favour of violating the human rights of male infants, on the other hand... I hope your vague comment was a your way of saying that while you're happy with your penis, you will respect your child's right to his own body and leave his alone.
/r/MensRights10/09/17 03:31 AM
4

What the fuck are you talking about?
/r/MensRights10/09/17 03:28 AM
1

Basically every thing in this article is wrong. That's not even hyperbole. Fuck this gynocentric Earth.
/r/MensRights09/09/17 11:24 PM
9

Based on this poster's history I'd say he's a political shill using r/MensRights to promote his politics. I've seen some of his posts before and they're re rarely related to men's issues at all.
/r/MensRights09/09/17 05:03 PM
6

You're citing the opinion of an American medical body. (a country where male genital mutilation is endemic) Did it even occur to you to look at what medical authorities from other developed countries have to say on the subject? Europe, Australia, Canada, New Zealand... In fact, there's a scathing reply to the AAPs latest circumcision brief by dozens of European organisations/doctors. This is what I mean when I talk about cultural brainwashing. You're perfectly conditioned to remain in your littl…
/r/MensRights09/09/17 06:24 AM
1

Female circumcusion is not worse than male circumcusion. Sounds to me that you've allowed yourself to buy into the gynocentric brainwashing being peddled by feminists and other groups complicit in the neglect of men and boys.
/r/MensRights09/09/17 05:51 AM
11

Get the fuck out of here. Man up? What the fuck does that even mean? Accept your lot as an unfeeling meatsacks whose only purpose is to provide utility to women and society? Nothing else you could have said would have proved you're not a MRA better than this shitty little phrase. You don't give a fuck about men
/r/MensRights09/09/17 05:41 AM
6

So you think that a penis that has had parts of it cut off and it's function degraded is 'better looking' than a healthy, complete and fully-functioning organ? And you don't think that's the result of brainwashing from your culture? Do you also think uncircumcised pussies are gross? You're perpetuating the sexist human rights abuses committed by people around you and you don't even realise it. You were branded like cattle and you're and somehow you're OK with that. Dogs some countries have more …
/r/MensRights09/09/17 05:38 AM
6

I was circumcised when I was a baby and am perfectly happy I was. Uncircumcised penises are gross. You sound exactly like those brainwashed Egyptian women praising how much nicer it is to have had their clits cut off.
/r/MensRights09/09/17 04:46 AM
1

Left-leaning people have always been the majority here. You've got strange expectations.
/r/MensRights07/09/17 10:05 AM
1

But that claim in no way reflects reality. People get more liberal as they get older, at least in the context of the issues that were relevant in their youth. The poster above is absolutely right in saying that this apparent shift is almost solely to the culture around us changing faster than our beliefs.
/r/MensRights07/09/17 10:02 AM
5

Enamored? I voted for her because the alternative was worse. Doesn't mean I liked her at all. It's what happens when you have an inferior, outdated voting system.
/r/MensRights07/09/17 09:46 AM
1

Every poll we've ever done here shows most of us are pretty left-leaning by American standards.
/r/MensRights07/09/17 09:42 AM
1

Just repeating something over and over doesn't make it true. It's starting to feel like I'm talking to a retarded parrot so this will be my last post. And by the way, I've linked you the in-house results posted by OK Cupid twice now. Fuck off now.
/r/MensRights06/09/17 02:35 PM
-1

I've been involved in enough stupid arguments on Reddit in the last few days. Have a good night.
/r/MensRights06/09/17 02:16 AM
1

Don't be fucking stupid. If anything, patriarchies ( when they still existed saw women as being very worrying creatures. So many positive qualities have been classically associated almost exclusively with womanhood. Purity, gentleness, caring, gentleness, nurturing etc. Obviously generally Most human cultures to date have seen women as more innocent than men, less capable of doing harm etc. Kali comes to mind, and so do all those horrible women in Western fairy tales. Like most deities in Hindui…
/r/MensRights06/09/17 01:41 AM
1

So your partner has done a study so that make you some sort expert? I'm do research too (different field). But thanks for being a patronising cuntbucket.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 11:17 PM
2

Just-so stories, you has them.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 11:15 PM
1

27 is more than adequate here due to the sheer size of the effect being measured, specially because this is hardly original research. This article is just showing has been corroborated to hell and back by in-house stats from other dating companies, with virtually the exact same distribution. As well as other research; this one with 14 data points And lets not even get started on all the studies out there on female hypergamy.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 11:11 PM
1

Futuristic technology could also solve the problem but it's essentially a race against time since men are responsible for almost all innovation. Technology progresses faster than any other social or natural force shaping our lives. It makes social factors irrelevant; even genetics and evolutionary pressures will be rendered moot. The lives of people by the end of century will be unrecognisable to most of us living today.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 09:34 PM
2

It doesn't matter the expected effect size. What? Yes it does; it's one of the most important factors. Statistics.. it doesn't change just because you can't make it work for your benefit. Have you ever actually been involved in research? Jesus on a stick everyone on Reddit thinks they are a fucking PhD. I'm done with this or I'm going to have an aneurysm. What part of: "These numbers have been corroborated time and tiem again by unrelated sources" don't you understand?
/r/MensRights05/09/17 09:25 PM
1

I don't think it's pedantic, he makes it sound as if other cultures are better about it.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 09:23 PM
1

The most important factors that determines the appropriate sample size for a study is the complexity of the subject being analized and the expected effect size. A large effect has a massive impact on the power of your study. Not only that, not every study requires 95%+ confidence; most social science research trends closer to 90%. I'd be more concerned about how these 27 people were selected. This is all besides the point because these numbers have been corroborated by other sources. His finding…
/r/MensRights05/09/17 06:41 PM
0

We're back to you not knowing what the fuck you're talking about. The overwhelming majority of studies of this type have less than a 100 responses. If they're qualitative you're likely to see <10. I recently assisted my partner and one of his colleagues with gathering data for a study on male- on-female domestic violence among Orthodox Jews and we got 62 usable data points. This is normal.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 05:46 PM
11

The West? That's basically all cultures throughout history forever.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 02:10 PM
3

https://theblog.okcupid.com/your-looks-and-your-inbox-8715c0f1561e
/r/MensRights05/09/17 02:05 PM
1

OR I've studies statistics and know that you can't push a sample size of 27 very far. My partner's dissertation used a sample size of 19. There's no such thing as a required subject pool size in the social sciences, it can vary greatly depending on the question you're trying to answer. For very simple quantitative analysis such as this 25-35 is a good range, depending on methodology. The results of the research in the OP are basically exactly the same as that conducted by OKCupid. The numbers ar…
/r/MensRights05/09/17 02:02 PM
1

I'm not about to start an argument with a train of people that don't have a clue what they're talking about; I've had enough of that on Reddit lately. If you knew even the basics of how social research is conducted, you might understand why a subject pool of 27 is not necessarily a problem. Since you don't, it means that you're ignorant yet so convinced of your own faculties that you're willing to get involved in someone else's discussion to spout off nonsense. Ergo, nothing I say will make make…
/r/MensRights05/09/17 01:27 PM
1

No it's not. That's a perfectly normal subject pool for most research of this nature.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 12:54 PM
1

This right here is basically the reason Western Civilisation as we know it is doomed. We will either collapse and regress to traditional gender roles or (more likely) use technology to bridge the gap in some manner---and women won't like either outcome.
/r/MensRights05/09/17 12:49 PM
1

All these gymnastics are getting me dizzy. It's called moral philosophy; ethics. In other words, thinking carefully about your values and why you believe the things you do. I understand you probably have never spend a single day in your life evaluating right and wrong but not everyone is like you. Suggesting that altering a fetus is OK because its not a person, but you're altering that fetus for no purpose other than to alter the eventual person loops back around to the loony part. The foetus is…
/r/MensRights04/09/17 12:08 AM
1

Surely you're just kidding around. With all the outrage out there of removing someone's agency with "don't be gay" shock therapy and camps and such, that's some fine trolling to suggest you might make someone gay. Most people are too stupid to have internally consistent moral systems; you should try and be better than that. The reasons it is unethical to try and turn gay people straight are multiple: These methods don't actually work They are often physically and psychologically torturous They a…
/r/MensRights03/09/17 09:45 PM
1

Are you serious? I'm always up for discussion and debate; that's not an issue. You have the gall to act all wounded when you started out right off the bat by insulting me and continued doing it throughout our exchange. Surely no one can be this socially oblivious and self-centred?
/r/MensRights03/09/17 06:32 PM
1

And I think you might be a low IQ meatsack---but I don't want to stop you from having children. Mind your own damn business.
/r/MensRights03/09/17 04:46 AM
1

That doesn't make the concept of genetically engineering kids to be gay any less loony. Loony in what sense? We only need two things to make it possible: an effective means to edit the genome---CRISPR is probably it---and sophisticated enough algorithms to process all the mounds of sequenced genomes we have and correlate genes to specific traits. It's not that far off. If you mean you think it's unethical, that's your own business. As long as you keep your opinions to yourself and don't try to l…
/r/MensRights03/09/17 04:03 AM
1

Yes. I explicitly said as much in my post; it's not possible yet.
/r/MensRights02/09/17 07:54 PM
1

What you are saying is, as far as I'm aware, impossible. Or at least has not happened according to my knowledge. It would require serious error on part of the fertility clinic; they guarantee their results. We're not talking about procedures where faster swimming sperm is used, but one where one of the eight cells in a three-day embryo is cut away and examined too see whether it contains the right chromosomes. It's the same procedure we're using for genetic screening. That said, if by some mirac…
/r/MensRights02/09/17 07:53 PM
1

No point getting outraged about a hypothetical. By the time it's actually possible most parents will be too busy creating super babies to give a fuck. It's the usual adoption curve with technology. Besides, 99% of straight parents wouldn't hesitate to make sure their kids don't turn out gay---and I think it's their choice. Unless they're seeking to modify their children in ways that leave their kids worse off I say go for it. I just want to exercise the same choice.
/r/MensRights02/09/17 11:31 AM
1

We're selecting the sex of the embryos, as I wrote above.
/r/MensRights02/09/17 10:06 AM
1

Feel free to elaborate.
/r/MensRights02/09/17 10:05 AM
1

What problem? Being a straight man in the modern world is pretty terrible; I'm more thankful everyday that I'm gay. The abyss between men and women is only bound to grow more, not less, over the coming decades. I would want my son to have a life closer to mine and less than all my straight high school buddies. Divorce, parental alienation, forced celibacy... Not fun prospects. You can do everything perfectly as a straight man and still end up with a terrible life. As a gay man, on the other hand…
/r/MensRights02/09/17 09:57 AM
-2

Me and my partner are having biological sons---one his and one mine---using the womb from one woman and the carefully selected egg from another. Closest to genetic engineering we have at the moment. Technology is amazing.
/r/MensRights02/09/17 02:21 AM
-2

It's a moot point for me and my partner. We decided to go with a surrgogate for our two boys. (we're doing sex selection) It's more expensive, specially taking into account we have to move to a surrogacy friendly state and are using an international egg donor to ensure the surrogate and donor have no legal rights, but it's worth the peace of mind. I wasn't sold on raising kids that didn't have my or my partner's genes anyway, and we didn't want to adopt older kids or kids with special needs so e…
/r/MensRights02/09/17 01:24 AM
0

I mean, these tiny humans have their own heartbeat, their own DNA, their own bloodtype So does a braindead patient and we use them as organ farms. Can it suffer and is self-aware? It has moral value. It's not? It has no moral value. It's capable of suffering but not self-awareness? Then it has some moral value, but less than a person. Foetuses should be treated as something with the moral value of a similarly aware animal.
/r/MensRights31/08/17 07:52 PM
1

Are you not reading anything I'm writing? In the absence of evidence you should default to the null hypothesis, which is that there is no difference between populations. If the evidence available fails to counter the null hypothesis (as it does here) then you should default to the null hypothesis. You're basically asking me to prove a negative. If you don't know why that is ridiculous then we've got bigger problems here and I doubt there can be a productive exchange between us at all. I'm assumi…
/r/MensRights31/08/17 07:17 PM
3

Or maybe you've bought into the narrative of rape as a sacred cow and are speaking from convenient instead of for justice.
/r/MensRights31/08/17 04:34 PM
2

Subsection (b) specifically requires intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, or degrade OR to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person. So if a man were to penetrate a woman for some other reason courts wouldn't find him guilty of rape? What you're saying is asinine.
/r/MensRights31/08/17 04:33 PM
1

There is more than enough evidence to support the claim that FGC is not worse than MGC. It's just not perfect evidence; as things stand now however you have no rational reason to believe otherwise. There's no such thing as "complete evidence" in science unless we're talking about mathematical proofs and even then... And by the way, in the absence of all evidence you should fall to the null hypothesis; you're doing the opposite. Assuming difference unless proven otherwise. This is unscientific.
/r/MensRights31/08/17 04:28 PM
2

Would you have accepted OP's title if it had said "Circumcision should be legally considered rape?" I doubt most defectors here would have. Either way, to me it is at least implied.
/r/MensRights31/08/17 07:24 AM
6

Did you know there are countries where it's legally impossible to rape a man? Quoting laws completely misses the point. Some things that are illegal shouldn't be and some that are should not be. My personal definition of rape is: The penetration of envelopment of the genitals, mouth or anus of a non-consenting party. Obvious exceptions being life-saving interventions and such.
/r/MensRights31/08/17 05:22 AM
6

Your argument that circumcision is rape doesn't rely on this definition you posted, it relies on the definition of "sexual act". The same exact document defines a sexual act as: (1)Sexual act.—The term “sexual act” means— (A) contact between the penis and the vulva or anus or mouth, and for purposes of this subparagraph contact involving the penis occurs upon penetration, however slight; or (B) the penetration, however slight, of the vulva or anus or mouth, of another by any part of the body or …
/r/MensRights31/08/17 04:56 AM
3

It isn't fuckin rape Why?
/r/MensRights31/08/17 04:51 AM
3

Did you see what they define as "sexual act"? Circumcision involves the penetration of the male genitalia. Thus, it qualifies as rape.
/r/MensRights31/08/17 04:51 AM
2

You're presenting what I call an argument from incompletely evidence. If you were to only passively integrate the information that you are exposed to on a daily basis, you'd probably think that women are oppressed and men have it so much easier. Yet a quick perusal of the evidence available paints a completely different picture, but most people never get that far. What you know about genital cutting, you almost certainly know through passive observation. What you've heard from feminists and gyno…
/r/MensRights30/08/17 05:48 PM
9

And you know this from experience? Funny because every single intactivist I've worked with believes otherwise, as do I. In actuality it is one of the strongest arguments in our toolbox because the typical insane Western view that male and female genital cutting is so damn different is easy to undermine through evidence. The only defense cutters have against it is to feign outrage and taboo the discussion. Exactly the same thing feminists or religious people do when criticised. There's no differe…
/r/MensRights30/08/17 04:51 PM
2

It has a sample size of less than 100. And with a simple statement you reveal you have no clue as to research is conducted.
/r/MensRights30/08/17 04:00 AM
2

Yea you kinda lost there comparing rape You're right, it's actually worse. Rape generally does not leave lasting physical impairment except in rare situations.
/r/MensRights30/08/17 03:55 AM
1

A contracting population is a horrible thing. It means young people having to support more and more unproductive old people with their taxes.
/r/MensRights25/08/17 05:12 AM
19

That's stupid. Reddit's search doesn't work very well and even if it did, what exactly would you search for? If you're going to whine about reposts at least be rational about your demands.
/r/MensRights21/08/17 04:46 PM
4

That's like asking a Somalian doctor what he thinks about female circumcusion. You should read the European reply to the AAPs stance on circumcusion.
/r/MensRights19/08/17 06:33 PM
2

Studies done on the subject consistently show otherwise though.
/r/MensRights19/08/17 03:02 PM
1

Providing evidence does not convinced people. In fact, the more evidence you provide the more the person you're arguing with is likely to hold on to their beliefs.
/r/MensRights19/08/17 02:04 PM
1

What do you define as growth? Because for my purposes I'm talking about significant, purposeful and life-altering choices. From my own life: discarding religion and magical thinking, learning a new language, learning to play a musical instrument, becoming an intactivist, becoming an MRA, becoming a transhumanist, adopting a utilitarian moral system, becoming a vegetarian etc.
/r/MensRights10/08/17 03:23 AM
1

I agree people change all the time, but change is not the same thing as growth.
/r/MensRights10/08/17 01:05 AM
2

What? No they don't; most people are so intellectually static they might as well be rocks. It's going well so far. The organisations/groups I'm a member of are having a pretty good impact.
/r/MensRights10/08/17 12:32 AM
3

To continue to grow as a person and work to spread my values. To advocate for radical technological and social progress. Pretty much what you would expect from someone that belongs to the social circles and subculture that I do.
/r/MensRights09/08/17 10:34 PM
7

This group is not an actual medical authority, they're a tiny right wing org with a name meant to confuse people into thinking they have the authority of the AAP. (Who mind you, are far from perfect themselves)
/r/MensRights09/08/17 04:35 PM
4

That's your life goal? That's pretty pathetic .
/r/MensRights09/08/17 04:33 PM
1

This is the point of her article; she's angry that people are daring to criticise women for making the choice to genitally mutilate their boys.
/r/MensRights08/08/17 11:48 PM
2

As someone in the health industry, patients will be much better without that "human touch", specially in nursing home and palliative settings. Most of the time it amounts to abuse to and neglect.
/r/MensRights04/08/17 07:56 PM
-4

Just expressing my honest opinion.
/r/MensRights01/08/17 12:41 PM
-7

I wish this faggot would fall off a bridge already. Maybe we can trade him with Isis for one of those poor men being thrown off buildings in Syria. I've hated him ever since I read that disgusting piece he wrote on male circumcision. Thankfully he's been a lot less promoted ever since the (silly) paedophilia scandal.
/r/MensRights01/08/17 12:00 PM
4

Very few countries practise routine infant circumcision commonly enough where something like this would happen; the majority of boys in the world get circumcised at ages 3-12. So yes, it's the US.
/r/MensRights30/07/17 05:19 PM
5

You're coming undone mate. Get a hold of yourself.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 09:25 PM
9

That's not a rebuttal. Also, since when are these exclusive clubs? I'm both an intactivist and an MRA.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 07:24 PM
13

You said intactivists made MRAs look bad. That's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 05:17 PM
1

I didn't associate Intactivists to Feminists, but nice try. I pointed out a common principle accepted by one and not the other. Who said anything about feminists? Besides yourself. I never even mentioned the word. Intactivism has lots of money with literally the easiest case to make ever, and yet it has not been able to ban male infant circumcision, which is it's goal. There's so much bullshit in this statement. If you honestly think that getting male circumcision banned is "easy" then you're ei…
/r/MensRights26/07/17 12:41 PM
1

It's adorable how you believe intactivist are somehow a subset of MRAs or can make them look bad by association, instead of the other way around. The intactivist movement is massive in comparison to the MRM, deals with millions of dollars of supporter donations, has chapters and organises protests in virtually ever state and many countries around the world---and more importantly, it's a lot more effective at disseminating its message and achieving its goals.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 11:25 AM
1

Brave woman; it takes a hell of a lot of courage to stand alone in a public place with an unpopular opinion.
/r/MensRights25/07/17 06:13 PM
1

Strangely, you seems to be from t_d What?
/r/MensRights18/07/17 09:59 PM
1

Watch some girlwriteswhat and typhonblue videos then get back to me.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 05:51 PM
2

Polite is not the same thing as productive. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from bringing obviously partisan narratives into this community. It's never amounted to anything good and never will. Only people that do it is those that have priorities that are at best orthogonal to the MRM or outright antagonistic.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 05:19 PM
2

Come on, there's a difference between political activism and partisan flag waving. We get people here from time to time trying to start fights by barracking for team purple and calling team green evil losers or politicising MR issues for their agenda.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 05:17 PM
3

Thai subreddit seems to have been taken over by r/the_donald posters. Once upon a time there was so much support for black men from this community. It's looking more like "straight white men complain about things that personally affects them".
/r/MensRights18/07/17 05:02 PM
2

There's no such thing as civil political discussion. It's inherently divisive and it has no place in this sub.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 03:11 PM
3

Did you just seriously tell me to man up? All that shows me is that you're here with a political agenda and aren't actual an MRA.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 03:07 PM
1

What people?
/r/MensRights18/07/17 01:08 PM
0

At least Trump govt. initiated something about uni. campus kangaroo courts. And did a hundred million other things that I and the majority of other left-leaning r/MR subscribers strongly disagree with. Are you a one issue voter? I'm certainly not, but if you put my commitment to MR issues against other things I care about the outcome will never be good. Every survey ever conducted on this community shows that, like most of Reddit, it is a young, left-oriented community. If you make the MR discus…
/r/MensRights18/07/17 01:08 PM
1

If you want to make the MRM into a Trump supporter only club, sure, go ahead. I, along with a good chunk of us (who are hardly right-wing, like is typical for the Reddit demographic) will just go do something else. Nothing good has ever come out of making discussion here about party politics and one of the good things about this sub has always been that the community is good at self-policing and freezing out flag wavers---until now I suppose.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 01:04 PM
-1

Blame the person that linked to the Donald. Making things political will never lead to a good outcome.
/r/MensRights18/07/17 04:22 AM
0

That's merely two ethical systems in conflict; the formalised one designed for a specific purpose (to protect patients rights, dignity, reduce liability and to an extent safeguard cultural consensus) and the ad-hoc, often contradictory, irrational system that most people adhere to when they don't have the knowledge or desire to be morally consistent or maximise their values.
/r/MensRights16/07/17 10:47 AM
-1

That's a nonsebsical statement. How does "morals" differ from ethics and where exactly does it come from?
/r/MensRights16/07/17 03:01 AM
1

In that case I can make no sense of it. Your post was pretty ambiguous.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 07:57 PM
1

A common value of disgust due to a shared evolutionary history is far from the same thing as innate immorality. Most humans are disgusted by feces but that does not make cropophilia immoral. But abortion is innately abhorrent, no matter what your position on it's legality. If you're making a comment on ethics, then the statement is wrong; if however you're making a comment on the physical grossness of abortion that's up for debate. To that I'll say that people can get used to anything; even the …
/r/MensRights15/07/17 06:46 PM
-2

But abortion is innately abhorrent, no matter what your position on it's legality. No it's not. A foetus has as much moral value as a comparatively capable animal---that is to say, some, and I say that as a vegetarian. In fact, philosophers like Singer, who I deeply respect, would say the same thing about a infant. (That they're not "persons") So be careful when using words such as "intrinsic" or "innate". There's no such thing in ethics.
/r/MensRights15/07/17 04:49 PM
8

Many, many MR supporters are hardly likable and I have no problem agreeing and defending them when they say something I believe to be true or pose valid concerns.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 01:02 AM
8

It's a clear case of sexism and gender discrimination; there are other concerns in the world besides those that affect you or that you care about. We (rightfully) get dozens of stories on here about straight men getting their shit taken by their wives or being kept from seeing their kids, none of which affects me in any way. Should I turn around and say it doesn't matter? Workplace discrimination affects people's livelihoods, it's not exactly a non-issue.
/r/MensRights14/07/17 01:00 AM
–

Even funnier, two months later she shacked up with the dead guy's brother. How much would you bet on her fucking him behind the husband's back? You'd think the brother at least would be wiser, or at least more empathetic.
/r/MensRights11/07/17 07:54 PM
0

Happiness and Success are to subjective IMO. That goes without saying, hence why these studies are based on the subject's experience. They've consistently found that children are a net negative for the healh of a relationship and that parents are less satisfied with their lives.
/r/MensRights04/07/17 10:26 PM
8

Except for all the studies that show that couples with children are less happy, and less successful in the long term than those without. Having might seem nice to those that have them, because of all the evolutionary hardwiring involved but if you don't have them there's zero reason to get them.
/r/MensRights03/07/17 10:37 PM
3

It's really not. People overwhelmingly reject attacks upon their sacred cows regardless of how intelligent. A Christian is almost just as likely to casually reject an argument against his religion regardless of whether it comes from Sam Harris or an adolescent r/atheism poster.
/r/MensRights03/07/17 01:12 AM
1

Are you a Libertarian?
/r/MensRights02/07/17 08:09 PM
4

Once again, circumcision involves the explicit penetration of the male genitalia. As in, having objects traumatically inserted into the penis e.g. the probes used to rip apart the tissue that in infants adheres the foreskin to the glans. As to the sexual componer of rape, as far as I'm aware the only relevant factor is consent. Intent is mostly irrelevant; you don't need to intend to serve sexual gratification, or actually do so, from the act in order for it to be considered rape.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 08:15 PM
8

Infant circumcision involves obvious and traumatic penetration of the male genitalia. Also, your given definition does not make it clear whether genital envelopment---the most common form of female on male rape---qualifies as rape.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 06:08 PM
5

Sure. How about we start with what your personal definition of rape, so that you can't move the goalposts on me halfway through.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 05:22 PM
14

Well, you must realize this sub is in the minority in relation to modern Western society, right? Are you insane? Most Westerners think circumcision of children is disgusting and absolutely genital mutilation. I bet you'd be the first to get defensive when someone makes a comment about how ignorant and self-centered Americans are---yet here you are, proving it to be so.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 01:37 PM
8

This is especially relevant for gay males. What evidence there is on the impact of circumcision on HIV transmission, regardless of how flawed, is explicitly and exclusively relating to heterosexual, female to male transmission. Every single study ever conducted on the subject, without exception, shows that it has no impact among men who have sex with me.
/r/MensRights01/07/17 01:35 PM
4

There is simply no way to argue that circumcision is rape. Really? It's a pretty easy argument to make. (Regardless of whether I agree)
/r/MensRights01/07/17 01:32 PM
4

Whatever.
/r/MensRights23/06/17 04:51 PM
6

I've been a contributing member of this community for six years and been an activist for even longer. When exactly did you become an MRA? Are you actually saying that ending genital mutilation is not part of the MR platform? Have you even read the sidebar; do you visit any other MR-relevant sites? There's only like a dozen articles about it on AVFM. And did you honestly just tell someone else to man up? Seriously... You're not an MRA and you don't belong here.
/r/MensRights23/06/17 02:29 PM
5

I think that's pretty obvious and is reflected in the MR literature. So many of the problems that men experience are caused or exacerbated by the fact that straight men see other men as as invisible at best and competitors at worst.
/r/MensRights23/06/17 01:40 PM
5

I'm subscribe to men's rights [...] Then it shouldn't come as at surprise that posts about male genital mutilation reach our front page; it's part of our platform and has been from the very beginning. Which once again, begs the question, what the fuck are you doing here?
/r/MensRights23/06/17 12:32 PM
13

What are you doing on this subreddit exactly? Did you somehow miss the name? This is a community concerned with the human rights of men and boys, not a place where the only injustice and discrimination we are allowed to address are the ones that you think are important. We get it, you mutilated your son(s) and are obviously defensive. Guess what, so did thousands of other people that have come to regret violating their son's right and now work against the practise. It's painful to admit you made…
/r/MensRights23/06/17 05:06 AM
1

Thankfully there are people with different focuses for activism so everything can be worked on at once.
/r/MensRights21/06/17 01:52 PM
2

If you don't know the answer to that question then you should not be writing so authoritatively about it. The rates of long term sequels vary wildly by region and depending on the procedure and setting. Just like male genital cutting.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 07:53 PM
9

You're comparing apples to oranges. Do you think that male circumcisions done in the bush in Africa have better outcomes? That's without even getting into the subject of the different kinds of genital mutilation practised around the world and their varying degrees of severity, regardless of sex. You're a perfect example of how a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. You've been exposed to the feminist/western narrative on female genital cutting but as usual, are completely oblivious to the …
/r/MensRights20/06/17 05:57 PM
8

Fuck off with that bullshit. What exactly is different between them?
/r/MensRights20/06/17 04:46 PM
1

The current number of circumcised men doesn't reflect current social trends. Most adult men alive and sexually active today were born decades ago. Most babies born in Canada today will not be circumcised. 80 to 60% of them, in fact.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 04:44 PM
1

It's that way now, in most places. It didn't use to be in the many decades that the practise has been common in the US.
/r/MensRights20/06/17 04:41 PM
1

You don't even know if OP contacted the relevant people with a complaint. We both know he didn't. How much would you bet on this? That said, I asked him whether he had. That's the part you are missing. When you come in accusing people of doing nothing and "masturbating" over perceived oppression, you are being an asshole; not changing minds. My intent was to ask OP whether he did do something about this himself, which would have been effective. As opposed to what he did do (posting it here), whi…
/r/MensRights19/06/17 08:30 PM
1

And sometimes those people are right. The only thing that matters is the audience. If a group (different when they comes to individuals) of people hate your message they're going to react the same way whether you're polite or not. It's ironic that someone that posts in a men's right community wouldn't know this.
/r/MensRights19/06/17 07:02 PM
0

This could not be more false. How convenient that it's impossible to tell the difference between being an asshole and telling an unpopular truth. You can look at my post and say "see, the reason you're getting downvoted is because you're an asshole" and feel perfectly justified. I, on the other hand, see things quite differently.
/r/MensRights16/06/17 11:25 PM
-2

There was nothing "assholish" about my original post. I simply asked a question and elaborated upon the reason why I asked. "Point I'm failing to make"? Are you arguing against the fact that OP should have said something about it? Wanna take a bet on whether he did? If everyone relegates responsibility for the sake of empty backpatting and shit stirring nothing changes. The reason why downvotes and comments like yours roll off my back is that I am actually an activist/advocate; which is what the…
/r/MensRights16/06/17 07:08 PM
-1

Your reply basically says nothing that we didn't already well know and it does not even address my point, though by the upvotes you'd think it was relevant and insightful. Almost as if the idiots downvoting me without a comment needed an outlet for their disagreement that didn't quite go as far as having to engage with someone. That might end up being effective and as the post above, most of the people in this community can't be arsed.
/r/MensRights16/06/17 04:42 PM
-29

Did you do something about it? There's millions of tiny little injustices in the world; of all the people posting here you're probably the only one in a position to do anything. All the rest of us can do is masturbate about how shitty it is, which is wholly useless.
/r/MensRights16/06/17 03:05 PM
3

Circumcision in Korea is a curious beast. It's an American import and for some reason it's seeing a sharp decline in the last two decades, according to research.
/r/MensRights14/06/17 03:58 AM
2

How would you know that circumcision caused him an issue? You missed my point. At no point did I claim circumcision had caused him an issue, besides the obvious loss of the functions that the foreskin provides. What I did was ask him how he'd be able to recognise if it had.
/r/MensRights13/06/17 10:21 PM
5

See, that's what I'm wondering. How many of us were actually adversely affected by it and how many of us are just arguing it for the sake of arguing it? If you ask the average Somalian woman with the most severe form of female genital cutting if she has been harmed by her circumcision she's likely to say 'no'. Victims of genital mutilation generally do not see themselves as prejudiced; if they did they wouldn't be so eager to subject their sons and daughters to it. In fact, victims are some of t…
/r/MensRights13/06/17 08:27 PM
1

"Actual communism" like "free market libertarianism" has never existed.
/r/MensRights12/06/17 02:27 AM
3

Yes, quite right. Or do you have anything of substance to add?
/r/MensRights06/06/17 04:51 PM
3

Morality is subjective; unless you're an idiot that believes there's an old dude in the sky or believe in crazy shit like "natural rights".
/r/MensRights06/06/17 04:48 PM
12

You shouldn't be excommunicated by some dumb blog site - you should be in jail. No. What the fuck is wrong with you? (And the fucknuggets that upvoted you?)
/r/MensRights06/06/17 04:44 PM
11

For some, circumcision is a non-issue [...] For some, male domestic abuse and female on male rape are a non-issue. We generally call them feminists, not MRAs.
/r/MensRights01/06/17 12:29 AM
12

Cops that are women are usually equal to their peers. What do you base this on?
/r/MensRights29/05/17 07:23 PM
3

They don't. What you're thinking of might be a preputioplasty, but they don't really work the same way.
/r/MensRights25/05/17 03:30 PM
–

Wait what? Can you cite those stats because last time I checked I'm pretty sure most slaves today are male heavy labourers.
/r/MensRights22/05/17 03:06 PM
3

Hey, why did my comment get removed? It wasn't meant to be insulting.
/r/MensRights07/05/17 11:42 PM
1

I'm a utilitarian so that argument falls on deaf ears for me. I can easily imagine hundreds of scenarios where using chemical weapons would be justifiable.
/r/MensRights30/04/17 10:39 PM
–

Of course you do; offering exclusive services like that applies.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 11:23 PM
–

Then the side that does wins.
/r/MensRights29/04/17 11:22 PM
2

Tell me something, why the hell are you posting on a community about anti-male discrimination and male issues if you don't actually care about men enough to have an intellectually honest discussion on the subject? I'll explain my argument fully even though you're obviously participating in bad faith: When people claim that FGC is worse than MGC they are only doing a partial measure. Like cystic fibrosis, FGC is worse on average but that doesn't mean it causes more suffering and harm. The common …
/r/MensRights30/03/17 11:18 PM
1

What the hell are you talking about? My argument has nothing to do with consensus. You are still not answering my question: what is worse, cystic fibrosis or the common cold?
/r/MensRights30/03/17 10:31 PM
1

As I said, that's physically impossible. Either you're lying or it's so normal to you that you cannot even tell what you're looking at.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 10:30 PM
7

Ironic you should revel in the fact that the men rights movement is not mainstream. Even more ironic because the anti-circumcision movement is much bigger than the MRM and very much not a "small voice". Are you even aware of the fact that the circumcision rates in the US have been dropping steadily for decades? As to our opinions being a small voice---I call bullshit on that. The rejection of male genital mutilation has been part of the MRA platform since the very beginning and near ubiquitous s…
/r/MensRights30/03/17 10:27 PM
1

I could care less about you or your penis. What you are stating however is literally physically impossible and anyone with even a little understanding of the way the human body heals would understand why. When a part of the penis like the foreskin excised two very different kinds of tissues are joined together; skin and mucous membrane. Since it is brute forced through destructive surgery there's no transitional tissues between the two and the separation is always stark and easily visible.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 06:12 PM
1

The problem with this subreddit is the far-right scum like you that keep flowing in and drowning out any leftist voices [...] Sure, if you ignore the fact that I've been here from the beginning. I'm one of the original anti-circumcision posters here, though I used to be far more active. [...] but I will attest that Islam is 100 times more honorable than you or the scum that think like you. In what way, exactly? I made a pretty blanket statement when I said that there's little good about Islam. S…
/r/MensRights30/03/17 06:11 PM
1

I asked a simple question that is pertinent to the discussion: what do you believe is "worse", cystic fibrosis or the common cold? It might seem unrelated but it's very relevant to my point.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 06:04 PM
1

I've been a contributing member of this community six times longer than your account has existed. You're going to have to try harder than that. r/MR trends liberal/centrist but I didn't expect to find an Islam apologist in the comments here. You usually restrict yourselves to far left echo-chambers. I mean, unless you're not actually disagreeing with my claims that there's nothing good about Islam and the world would be better off if it didn't exist?
/r/MensRights30/03/17 05:44 PM
2

Bigotry is unreasonable bias. There's nothing unreasonable about hating Islam. Granted, I dislike almost all religions but Islam is by far the worst. There's not a single good thing I can say about it; the world would be a better place in every sense if that religion died out.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 05:37 PM
1

You're lying. What you're saying is quite literally physically impossible.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 05:25 PM
1

What is worse, cystic fibrosis or the common cold?
/r/MensRights30/03/17 05:20 PM
5

Why do you hate her? I've always respected her anti-Islam sentiments myself.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 05:20 PM
–

Don't worry FlinkeRose, we're right behind you. These pro-circumcision posters don't hang around for too long---though unfortunately new ones pop up every time newbies learn about MR.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 05:17 PM
7

Do you deny the feminists are one of our biggest enemies?
/r/MensRights29/03/17 10:55 PM
1

Forced circumcisions of... adults? Like pinning them down? Yes? It happens in Indonesia and all over Africa. Probably other places too. That's leaving aside the bits of the Middle East currently going through civil where forceful conversion and mutilations are occuring. How do you know an intactivist would be killed in Palestine? The same way I know gays are. Do I need a citation for that too? There is. Turkey has one. That's interesting because I know of a few efforts in Israel, from ads on bus…
/r/MensRights24/03/17 10:14 PM
1

But what we want is for circumcision of children to stop right? That's one thing I want, sure. Therefore I'm not sure why you are ignoring the part about muslims also speaking against the practice. I'm not ignoring anything. That was your point, not mine. Good for them. The post I replied was one that said Palestine is a "wonderful country", which is what I disagreed with. Aside from circumcision, Israelis are relatively OK. Tel Aviv has an amazing pride parada I've always wanted to see. On the …
/r/MensRights24/03/17 07:30 PM
2

I guess you aren't interested in questioning your anti-muslim/pro-jewish narrative I have a love/hate relationship with Jews. I hate the genital mutilation but have a positive view of their ongoing contribution to humanity even so. I have nothing nice to say about Islam or Muslims aside from the fact that I've met some individual Muslims who were good enough people. You're seriously delusional if you think it isn't very much entrenched in judaism. This is a straw man and in no way resembles my a…
/r/MensRights24/03/17 06:51 PM
4

Lets not act like it's part of the mainstream debate in Israel. Intactivism is not mainstream anywhere where male circumcision is endemic, not even the US. That said, there are intactivist organisations in Israel and they're much, much farther ahead than the whole of the Muslim world. How are muslims crazier about it? The practise is much more entrenched among Muslims than Jews, with barely anyone questioning it. Jews are overrepresented in intactivist movements everywhere, specially in the US.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 06:37 PM
10

A wonderful country? Muslims are even crazier about circumcision than Jews. At least Israelis are starting to question the practise. There are even intactivists in the country.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 01:41 PM
21

Go away.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 01:40 PM
8

By authorities I mean paediatric and medical ones. I thought that was obvious in context. European reply to the AAP's out of consensus report Danish medical authorities I could find similar from virtually every developed country. Yes cultures that practice(spelled that for you) Is this a joke or are you really this ignorant? throat mutilation(removing tonsils) seem to find reasons to defend it. Funny you should mention that because routine tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy have severely fallen out…
/r/MensRights22/03/17 07:36 PM
9

As I have stated before I direct you to the Mayo clinic, WHO, and the APA. So yes the debate has been settled a while ago. Settled with science. Funny how all European authorities, plus Aus, NZ and Canada seem to disagree. It's almost as if cultures that practise genital mutilation tend to find reasons to defend it.
/r/MensRights22/03/17 05:55 PM
8

You either care about the rights, safety and well-being of men and boys or you don't. Picking and choosing based on what affects you personally doesn't make you an activist/advocate, it makes you a self-service asshole. As a gay man the majority of the stuff that's on the MR platform doesn't affect me in any way. Unfair family court, divorce, alimony, rape panic, Duluth model etc. etc. I could easily focus on the couple of issues that affect me and leave straight men to fend for themselves. The …
/r/MensRights22/03/17 01:37 PM
14

Deal with it. It's not going to change any time soon, and we aren't going to stop working to make it happen.
/r/MensRights01/03/17 03:21 AM
2

This sub is turning into r/Atheism before the clean-up. I don't even bother coming here anymore.
/r/MensRights28/02/17 03:06 PM
5

Women produce more smegma than men do, not to mention all kinds of other organic secretions. How often do you come across a cheesy vagina?
/r/MensRights14/02/17 11:07 PM
1

Some might support it some might be against like every other person in America but they're not part of the reason circumcision endures as a practise.
/r/MensRights09/02/17 08:07 PM
1

What does feminism have to do with male circumcision?
/r/MensRights09/02/17 05:11 PM
1

Yeah, but idk anything about Egyptian women opinions, or health of vaginas. Have you heard of the practise of foot binding in China that existed up until about a century ago? Mothers would bind their young daughters' feet with lengths of silk until the bones of the foot would break, as to produce a small as possible foot. This was considered the beauty standard in the region and women without broken feet struggled finding a husband and fitting in with society It's an extreme case but the point i…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:30 PM
3

It's not as safe you nincompoop. Can you please cite the specific papers comparing the morbidity of male and female circumcisions in similar settings? Because from what I can see your wikipedia article does not do so. Also, there's no need to get emotional or make things personal. The purpose of discourse is to learn. It's terrible and absolutely not comparable to having some skin off the tip of your dick cut off. Well, the foreskin is comprised of more than skin, but even so. Why not?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:24 PM
5

Not joking at all. How are they different?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:20 PM
8

The fact is, they're applied to millions of children every year without their consent [...] Can you substantiate this claim? What percentage of children do you believe undergo these painful procedures without informed consent? Do you not realise that, if anything, this calls into question the American practise of orthodontics; not circumcision? And if you're going to imply that a cut man's penis functions improperly, you're gonna have a bad time. The foreskin serves three main functions: Sensiti…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:19 PM
2

If women want to get circumcised then let them do it. It's not "women getting circumcised, it's mothers circumcising their daughters. Is this still OK? It's just not as safe or okay to do as male circumcision. Female circumcision is as safe or unsafe as male circumcision, depending on the setting. If done in a sterile clinical setting it is as safe as a male circumcision done in a hospital, if done out in the bush it is as safe as an equivalent male circumcision. You shouldn't care about how sen…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:14 PM
1

Mothers in Egypt don't want their daughters to feel like freaks, so they cut their clits off. Are they doing them a favour? Most circumcised Egyptian women would say yes, absolutely. Is their judgement reliable?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:11 PM
1

Why?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:04 PM
2

Or maybe you're circumcised. It's quite common for circumcised guys not to know it, apparently. Also, most of us that grew up in cultures where natural genitals are the norm, prefer to see the penis covered by foreskin while flaccid.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:04 PM
8

I understand that this subject makes some circumcised men feel defensive but if you have nothing of value to contribute to the discussion why even bother going into a community you're not a member of, just to show everyone how triggered you are?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:03 PM
2

I was addressing your statement about pissing contests. If you want to argue that circumcision should not be done, you need to support that with evidence. Unfortunately that evidence will be interpreted as a personal attack; hence the "pissing contests".
/r/MensRights06/02/17 07:01 PM
6

You didn't address my actual reply. Can you please answer the questions?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:59 PM
1

If a baby has a giant birthmark on their forehead, do we wait until the baby is 18 before we cut it off because "muh free will"? The foreskin is a functional, non-anomalous part of the human body. Do you know what the functions of the foreskin, are? Legal Guardians of a child get to chose what medical procedures are done to the child So it is acceptable for a mother to take her daughter to a clinic to have her clit or labia cut off?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:59 PM
1

Why?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:48 PM
7

This is not about you. It's the about the almost a million boys that will be mutilated this year in the US alone.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:47 PM
5

You cannot argue that circumcision is bad because it requires consent and is largely for cosmetic reasons, while also supporting braces and retainers, which carry the same traits. Bracers are done with the patients and do not result in a loss of function.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:46 PM
7

The vast majority of circumcised men are glad they are. So are the majority of circumcised women. People here pretend like it's even remotely close to FGM [...] How is it not?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:45 PM
1

Mushroom and anteater are the extremes. No they're not, by far. The overwhelming majority of intact penises have complete foreskin coverage when flaccid.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:43 PM
5

When I read these threads in reddit, I feel like I am the only man on the planet who is "okay" with being circumcised. What does your personal feelings about your penis have to do with the ethics of child circumcision? Equating infact circumcision with adolescent FGM is really stupid. FGM is also done during infancy and MGM is also done during adolescence. Sounds to me that you just don't know very much about the subject. Edit: to qualify my statement: getting mad about it changes nothing. Getti…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:43 PM
3

Please, feel free to go away.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:40 PM
8

Circumcision has been part of the MRM platform since the beginning. If you're only seeing it now, I can only surmise you've been a subscriber for less than a week. Hell, there are multiple posts on the front page about it right now.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:40 PM
3

I'd hate to be the freak with and uncircumcised dong. Are uncircumcised women in Egypt freaks?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:39 PM
7

Good for you. How is that relevant to the ethics of child circumcision?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:28 PM
14

Is she misinformed? American doctors are the only in the developed world that think so.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:28 PM
4

They're not mutually exclusive. I don't want to adopt orphaned Africa girls children but neither do I want them to get their clits scraped off.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:26 PM
20

Because child circumcision is a human rights violation and the current laws in most of the West are discriminatory against men. They protect girls, but not boys, from genital mutilation.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:25 PM
13

Are we really having this conversation? You're on r/MensRights. It's not exactly a secret that the MRM wants to end child circumcision. Imagine you are now female. Which of these would you allow inside? As an advocates for the rights of men, stating that men should be mutilated for the benefit of women is as opposed to our platform as oen can get. Also, why not use pictures of actual penises Do whatever you want to your own penis [...] Do you not see the irony here? That is exactly we we advocat…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:24 PM
6

Don't you have somewhere else to be? I could have sworn this subreddit was called MensRights.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:20 PM
4

When you're trying to prove something is harmful, it's kind of hard to do it without making it clear how the victims were harmed. In this case, the victims don't appreciate being thought of as such.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:19 PM
7

This is stupid. It's the parents decision. In Eritrea it is a mother's decisions whether he daughter gets to keep her external genitalia or not. Something's not good just because it was a parent's choice. We already have laws in most countries that limit the kind of things parents can "choose" for their kids, for example, burning them with cigarettes or electrocuting them. I wonder if anti circumcision people are pro abortion. If you think that killing the baby is fine but not cutting off some o…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:18 PM
1

No one is forced to circumcise their child so I'm wondering what your proposition is? That we respect the human rights of males the same way we do females.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:09 PM
1

Would you say the same thing to a circumcised woman involved in activism to stop female circumcision?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 06:08 PM
4

For starters, you're comparing removing foreskin to removing the clitoris Yes I am. The male equivalent would be cutting off the head of the penis and leaving a hole to piss through. No, it wouldn't, because the glans of the penis is a lot more functional than the clitoris. They're not equivalent. The clitoris only serves, or is involved, in one function: sexual satisfaction. The glans on the other hand is part of sexual, reproductive and even male renal function. At most you can say that the gl…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 05:36 PM
3

And uncircumcised men don't have any person experience on the subject so they're the least knowledgeable My point is that "personal experience" in this context is not a good thing. It makes people emotional and defensive. Would you say that East African mothers are an objective source of information of female circumcision? It seems like uncircumcised men are the most vehemently opposed to circumcision [...] Do you think those guys with bloody jumpsuits in the pictures are intact? The overwhelmin…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 05:08 PM
9

I'm entirely sure how someone would compare the sensitivity unless they were uncircumcised, fucked a lot, then got circumcised and took notes. That is one way, yes. There are others. Such as actually measuring the response in situ. Non-therapeutic adult circumcision study Comparative measurement of fine-touch sensitivity Cross-sectional partner survey Large correlational self-report study
/r/MensRights06/02/17 05:06 PM
6

How do you think circumcision started in the US? It was done to make masturbation more difficult/less pleasurable.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 04:57 PM
5

I'm saying that as a circumcised male, I don't have a problem with the practice [...] Neither do most circumcised women have a problem with having their daughters' clits and labia scraped off. Victims of genital mutilation are the least objective point of view, because for them it is personal.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 04:47 PM
5

Well, how about you list some of the reasons you believe that they're not the same so I can address them?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 04:46 PM
7

That's true, but what are people losing when they get circumcised? For someone that doesn't know the functions of the foreskin, you sure seem certain that it's useless. So the "mutilation" argument doesn't really hold much weight for me, because that implies that function/appearance is lost or degraded, and that's really not the case. The foreskin contains the most fine-touch sensitive parts of the penis as well as the frenulum which is the most densely innervated and erogenous structure in the …
/r/MensRights06/02/17 04:20 PM
14

The sheer physicality of generation after generation wearing constrictive garments having an effect on the physical structure and evolving of genitals vs non is what I am wondering I... I haven no idea what you're trying to say? That wearing tight clothes is squeezing foreskins out of existence due to some kind of Lamarckian selection? Do you actually know what the functions of the foreskin are? Yes or no.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 03:59 PM
12

Most MR posters are already American; it's an Americentric movement and Reddit is an American site. But advocating against child circumcision has been part of the platform for ages and most MRAs are against it. Maybe we're getting a surge from Midwestern meatheads searching for crap about the Superbowl due to the title.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 03:35 PM
–

Where are all these idiots coming from?
/r/MensRights06/02/17 03:18 PM
–

Question, what are the subs thoughts on foreskin being on the same level with appendixes and tonsils? First of all, neither the appendix or the tonsils are considered wholly vestigial ---in the sense that they no longer serve a purpose. There's a reason routine tonsillectomy is no loner performed in most of the world. The US can be exception, but they're always a bit behind. It's an erogenous claim. The foreskin is not vestigial in any way. In fact, humans have one of the most complex prepuces o…
/r/MensRights06/02/17 03:16 PM
15

The idiots that are saying realizing you didn't want to be circumcised later in life can make you depressed and lead to suicide are bonkers. Why? I'm sure it's happened to a few people maybe but that's not a valid reason to stop that from happening. Are the minority of circumcised women that are unhappy with it enough of a reason to stop this tradition? Everyone who's been circumcised later in life also says it's better. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06646.x/full
/r/MensRights06/02/17 03:09 PM
–

Getting emo about your missing foreskin is a borderline on body dismorphia. Would you say the same thing to a circumcised woman? The overwhelming majority of cut women in the world, regardless of the extent of their mutilation are very happy with it.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 03:07 PM
5

I have never stopped enjoy sex. Cutting the clit stops your from enjoying sex.. What studies do you base this on? It's funny how retarded vegetables need scientific evidence to prove that the foreskin is erogenous but will happily accept the claim that circumcised women don't enjoy sex without a single scrap of evidence.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 03:06 PM
10

How is forcibly removing a clitoris and removing a foreskin even in the same ballpark? Tell me how you believe it is not then, so I can address your reasoning.
/r/MensRights06/02/17 03:05 PM
63

You know that's bullshit right? In traditional societies with more defined gender roles women are just BETTER at emotional and psychological manipulation, as it is often the only kind of power they can exert. If you think that women from developing countries don't do this, it's because they're a lot better at it than you're used to detecting. That's my experience anyway as a Cuban gay guy; you would not believe the terrible things my female relatives and people from my country will say in my pre…
/r/MensRights22/01/17 04:16 PM
–

at what point do you think its a good idea to fuck a dumb fat abusive cunt like that and have a child with her.. Yes, because people don't lie or change---specially sociopaths. Just-world fallacy strikes again. he is just as much to blame... If you honestly believe that then your moral compass, and your reasoning abilities, are so utterly broken than nothing you have to say on the matter is of any value to anyone.
/r/MensRights17/01/17 11:16 AM
2

He's our resident nutcase; well, one of the persistent ones. Most don't last this long.
/r/MensRights15/01/17 04:11 AM
3

Thank you for the civil exchange; you seem like a kind and reasonable guy. Apologies if my wording made you uncomfortable/hurt your feelings. It comes with the territory unfortunately. Hopefully you'll keep this in mind if you ever have sons.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 07:53 AM
10

Just comparing a circumcision to cutting off a clitoris is vastly different. Is it different or do you believe that it is different? The two are not the same; somehow I doubt you're very up to date on the relevant research papers. Seems more likely to me that you're letting yourself be biased by your culture and personal experience. Of course, there's the fact that not all forms of female circumcision actually involve the destruction of the external clitoris but somehow I doubt you'd be as dismi…
/r/MensRights13/01/17 07:45 AM
9

People out there are making this more of a witch hunt. Circumcised women often say the same the same thing about nosy Westerners. The truth is, victims of genital mutilation are possibly the least objective people on the subject. For them, it's personal and once an issue becomes personal there's no space for reason.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 07:29 AM
12

Just talking about a little snip on the tip. Funny, that's usually what grandmothers slicing off their girl's genitals say about the clitoris. The foreskin is far from little; in an infant it comprises more than 2/3rds of the penis surface area and for adult men that can be anything from 1/4 to 1/2 of it. You've got some seriously vile views here.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 06:51 AM
3

Not at all. If women expected to have man's labour and even his very life (in traditional cultures, males were expected to sacrifice everything to protect their women which often amounted to hours dying in a blood-soaked field holding on to their intestines) then women had to reciprocate with something; in this case the assurance that the children they were carrying where actually sired by the men were protecting and providing for them. Remember, genes are the drivers of evolution. Men's genes a…
/r/MensRights13/01/17 01:47 AM
3

It's very obvious. A man can inseminate a million women but a woman cannot bear babies for a million men. Biologically, women's value to the propagation of genes is a lot greater; it's basic supply and demand.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 12:39 AM
0

I guess my point is that fertility rate aside, we don't NEED more babies. That's like saying "I'm pretty healthy side from this pesky cancer". If we want more babies, we could simply cut the supply to birth control, for example. That's a human rights violation.
/r/MensRights13/01/17 12:02 AM
7

Phimosis is a "common" condition (affects about 1% of adult men) and is easily remedied without any kind of surgery except in the very worst of cases. There are many methods to do that too, just google a bit.
/r/MensRights06/12/16 10:16 AM
3

That's pathetic.
/r/MensRights06/11/16 03:42 AM
–

People that use the term "neurodiversity" unironicaly tend to overlap heavily with morons that believe autism shouldn't be cured.
/r/MensRights30/10/16 03:38 AM
11

If being alive is worse than being raped, then it would be kinder to euthanize rape victims instead of letting them continue suffering. The "rape is worse than death" line of reasoning just doesn't make any sense.
/r/MensRights27/10/16 08:14 PM
5

You guys have had ass backwards laws for quite awhile. The US is no different, the silly laws are just different.
/r/MensRights27/10/16 04:26 PM
1

I know right? He's hot as hell; prison is going to wreck him. Or maybe give him muscles and tattoos.
/r/MensRights17/10/16 06:56 PM
2

I wouldn't put my life at risk trying to restrain anyone I thought was a serious threat to my well-being
/r/MensRights25/09/16 03:50 AM
6

I'm prepared to use lethal force to defend myself, why would I balk at merely hitting someone if I felt I had to?
/r/MensRights24/09/16 10:37 AM
1

Nice. I backed this; it's good to see it's finally coming out.
/r/MensRights20/09/16 02:24 PM
1

Fuck off.
/r/MensRights20/09/16 02:23 PM
1

You can fuck off too.
/r/MensRights20/09/16 02:23 PM
3

Good for ya buddy.
/r/MensRights14/09/16 03:08 AM
2

So how many dicks have you sucked in the last month?
/r/MensRights14/09/16 02:47 AM
8

I prefer dicks. Dicks are delicious.
/r/MensRights14/09/16 02:12 AM
7

WTF?
/r/MensRights14/09/16 01:36 AM
3

Yes, most of us blokes protect women. But those women have to be worthy of that protection. Yeah no thanks. I have no use for women apart from my female loved ones and friends—and I certainly would not risk myself to protect the latter any more than I would do so for male friends.
/r/MensRights15/08/16 04:01 PM
7

Might be the only sane thing in it, unfortunately.
/r/MensRights21/07/16 03:08 AM
0

Because then they won't get any pussy?
/r/MensRights15/07/16 07:36 PM
3

Go away.
/r/MensRights13/07/16 03:00 PM
3

Oh shut the fuck up. Despite making up a small number of the total circumcisions performed in the US (most of which are done by ignorant Christians and apatheists) Jews are disproportionately represented among anti-circumcision activists. There are plenty of Jews trying to stop the practise, even in Israel. In the US, there are more Jews fighting circumcision as a percentage of the relevant population than non-Jews. It doesn't seem that way however because the Jews that do support circ are fucki…
/r/MensRights13/07/16 02:59 PM
-4

This is kinda the same thing as saying "it's not the bully's fault, the person just doesn't have the self-respect to fight back." No, it's not.
/r/MensRights11/07/16 08:44 PM
–

This isn't women's fault; straight men just don't have any self-respect when it comes to pussy.
/r/MensRights11/07/16 06:06 PM
-2

As a gay dude, I have a hard time caring about unfair family courts, child support and divorce laws... In fact, most of the issues most talked about on the MR platform do not even affect me. EDIT: for the morons downvoting me, the above was sarcasm.
/r/MensRights11/07/16 03:19 PM
2

What are the chances of getting breast cancer? Lifetime risk of 12%. If you remove the breasts as a child what are you actually removing since obviously they havnt grown any like developed breasts. If you remove the breast buds, you virtually eliminate the risk of breast cancer. Can a woman who had a masectomy breast feed? No. Also were comparing removing what I'm assuming (in woman) is a major organ to in men what can arguably be called a vestigial organ that some Dr's would say has no medical …
/r/MensRights07/07/16 06:44 PM
2

I was hoping you'd say that. Should little girls be mastectomised to prevent breast cancer?
/r/MensRights07/07/16 05:46 PM
2

That is not how you perform a cost benefit analysis. Penile cancer is rare in men than breast cancer; should all newborns get preventive double mastectomies?
/r/MensRights07/07/16 04:23 PM
1

But you have no evidence of the negative impact on sexual function of female circumcision. I know this because I've read virtually every paper on the subject. What little research on the subject there is, is of low to middling quality and most of finds no difference between intact and circumcised women. So what exactly is this belief that female circumcision is worse based on? Besides the blind adoption of female-centric narratives? And don't play ignorant with me. Circumcision is part of the MR…
/r/MensRights12/06/16 10:27 AM
1

Concern trolling. As I said, if you don't like the MRM, feel free to go somewhere else. We're not going to change. Also, shouldn't the massive amount of downvoted you, and anyone else with beliefs like yours, routinely receive here be evidence that it also goes beyond the leadership? Let me guess, you will cite appeal to the masses. Well, if the opinions of our most prominent orgs doesn't count, and neither does that of the leaders of the movement or the people within it, WHAT exactly defines wh…
/r/MensRights12/06/16 02:33 AM
1

You realise that "us lot" make up the majority of the movement, right? Have you even looked at the sidebar in this subreddit? The stickied posts? Has it escaped your notice that literally every prominent person in the movement is vehemently against male genital mutilation? Do I even need to name names? Some of the most vocal and effective MR organizations, such as NCFM are also strongly against it? Have you ever even heard of Steven Svoboda? And really, abortion? That's hilarious. What happened …
/r/MensRights12/06/16 01:06 AM
1

You realise that "us lot" make up the majority of the movement, right? Have you even looked at the sidebar in this subreddit? The stickied posts? Has it escaped your notice that literally every prominent person in the movement is vehemently against male genital mutilation? Do I even need to name names? Some of the most vocal and effective MR organizations, such as NCFM are also strongly against it? Have you ever even heard of Steven Svoboda? And really, abortion? That's hilarious. What happened …
/r/MensRights12/06/16 01:06 AM
1

You're in the wrong community. Go away.
/r/MensRights11/06/16 11:31 PM
1

Also, did you just admit that only outcome and not intent matters? Cause it reads like you did.
/r/MensRights11/06/16 08:31 PM
1

You really don't know what you're talking about. The myths that perpetuate genital mutilation of females in Africa are virtually a mirror of those that do the same for MGM in the US. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.html That's what Hanny Lightfoot-Klein, one of the most renowned researched of FGM had to say about the subject. Bit back to my point--even if the main drive to circumcise women were indeed to deprive them of pleasure, and it…
/r/MensRights11/06/16 08:29 PM
1

FGM causes more damage on average but far less harm. And to say that FGM is intended to cause harm is preposterous, considering it is passed down from mother to slaughter and I doubt a majority of parents set out to purposely and mindfully hurt their children.
/r/MensRights11/06/16 06:04 PM
1

Intent factors into it. No it doesn't. Intent is relevant to whether harm has occurred in this context.
/r/MensRights11/06/16 08:54 AM
2

Lots of things aren't necessary. Get over it. Do you buy into the narrative that somehow "cunt" is worse than "dick"?
/r/MensRights03/06/16 07:21 PM
4

I was in tears when I was told of this. Chances are if you're involved in genital integrity activism you at least knew who Jonathan was. Lovely man, he deserved better—as do many, many men just like him. EDIT: I can't stop thinking about this. I keep going back to it; this could have been my partner or any of the men I've talked to over the years that are quietly dealing with depression and grief over this issue. In fact, chances are at least some of the ones I've lost touch with are now gone.
/r/MensRights10/05/16 09:30 PM
18

Everyone knows liberals are not men's friends, but there's still widespread delusion that conservatives are somehow on our side.
/r/MensRights09/05/16 04:59 PM
6

Yes, lack of sympathy has ever been the issue. No one gives a fuck about men, including most men.
/r/MensRights04/05/16 09:41 AM
1

Absolutely. Tribes all over the Pacific islands practised it long before contact from other parts of the world. Not just circumcision but all kinds of genital mutilation; subincision, so-called buttonhole circumcision, dorsal slitting, urethral perforation etc. Keep in mind genital mutilation originated in Africa and has existed since prehistory. Peoples made is as far as the Americans and either maintained the tradition or reoriginated it. There are tribes in the Amazon that still practise subi…
/r/MensRights21/04/16 01:32 AM
1

I'm not 100% sure. Some people say due to Islamic influence but as I said a lot of islander tribes in the pacific practise circumcision, as do Australian aborigines. That said, there were also a lot of tribes in the Philipines and it's unlikely all of them practised it, yet circumcision is near universal there today.
/r/MensRights21/04/16 01:11 AM
1

The muslims are spreading circumcision all over the place. Circumcision in the Philippines predates Catholicism. It used to be under Islamic control in the past but the practise was probably being done by the natives before then. Lots of tribes around the area practise genital mutilation of some kind.
/r/MensRights21/04/16 12:37 AM
3

This measure fine-touch sensitivity (like the tip of your fingers) not the kind of sensitivity you're probably thinking off.
/r/MensRights17/04/16 06:08 AM
2

That's already the case, at least in Australia.
/r/MensRights14/04/16 04:00 AM
2

The content of the English article is absolute trash. It's controlled by feminists who don't want it portrayed as equal to female circumcision, by Jewish editors trying to defend their religious right to mutilate their sons and by circumcision fetishists. Put any of the European articles through google Translate if you don't speak any European language and notice the difference.
/r/MensRights14/04/16 02:30 AM
6

I circumcised my three boys... Would you take it back if you could?
/r/MensRights14/04/16 02:29 AM
3

Male genital mutilation is a loaded term. So is female genital mutilation.
/r/MensRights14/04/16 02:28 AM
1

What seems so strange to me is that there are people who stretch what little skin is left to form a "new" foreskin but that such a technique can't be used to widen a tight opening. The problem is that sometimes in pathological phimosis the preputial sphincter will accrue microtears due to tightness which will turn into scar tissue, which will narrow the opening further. And if you try to stretch it, you'll get more tears then more scar tissue. A preputioplasty might work, but the success rates v…
/r/MensRights13/04/16 08:49 AM
4

Thank you. People like you make the world a little brighter. Now get breeding.
/r/MensRights13/04/16 05:07 AM
5

Why, oh, why, is the dick-snipping the tradition we have to hang on to? Rhetorical question I know, but it's a matte of self-image for men and since women have no personal stake in the issue it means there's no strong feelings involved either way. In my circumcised men and Jewish/Muslim ones in particular men are absolutely, pathologically invested in getting their sons cut at all costs. It's creepy as hell.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 09:12 PM
4

I'm really excited the AAP backed down, one of our lecturers actually mentioned this today. Really? It's very surprising that the news might be disseminating so quickly.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 08:24 PM
4

Awesome, thanks. I don't have journal access to that from here.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 06:58 PM
8

Well said! There's too much leftover respect for religious belief, even in secular countries. Please up-vote the post so we can get some visibility. This is pretty big news.
/r/MensRights12/04/16 06:31 PM
–

So after a couple of years of being mocked by European medical authorities one of the AAP's circumcision taskforce members—Jewish man that circumcised his sons—posted the above editorial on the latest, damning paper from Denmark Highlights from Andrew Freedman's editorial, courtesy of circinfo.org: In an editorial accompanying the Sneppen/Thorup paper, Andrew Freedman, a member of the circumcision policy taskforce, makes the following amazing admissions: Circumcision is basically and usually a r…
/r/MensRights12/04/16 06:16 PM
–

Australia has a pretty small population.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 01:42 PM
1

Life expectancy for homosexuals is much lower, even in a liberal city in liberal Canada - http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/6/1499.full You're moving the goalposts. Life expectancy is not happiness. Also, you're wrong. The particular bit of research, quoted by religious nuts everywhere, was specific to the AIDS crisis. There's a reason that you've cited a paper from 1996—it is the year when effective antiretroviral therapies emerged. The link you've ironically cited is a rebuttal by the a…
/r/MensRights10/04/16 12:05 PM
1

There are other factors involved, such as homophobia, being closeted etc. But when those are controlled for i.e gay men living openly in non-hostile environments, the data bears out. Gay men are happier than straight men who are happier than straight women who are about as happy or happier than lesbians. Same goes for male gay couples. They're happiest followed by straight couples with no kids. Straight couples with children are miserable.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 03:40 AM
1

I already told you what to do. Create a thread and see what people think. Until then, piss off. I'm done with you.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 12:49 AM
1

Lol. You think my beliefs are somehow out of step with that of other intactivists or MRAs? You obviously haven't been here long enough. How about you conduct an experiment. Start a new thread here or over at r/intactivism and ask them how they feel about ignoring Jewish circumcision. Go on.
/r/MensRights10/04/16 12:25 AM
1

Who gives a fuck mate. It wouldn't be the first time we've had to fight people that defend child abusers. You know were we stand. Now go away.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 11:45 PM
1

They're one of the world's most persecuted minorities, and it serves little purpose for no-circ (including myself) to pile on. And in this instance they completely deserve it. Are you aware that the Jewish circumcision ritual is one of the most torturous and abusive? We should leave the Jews alone and concentrate on educating the other 99% of circumcisers The Jews are small fish. They make up a tiny percentage of people that genitally mutilate their children. But they make up the majority (and t…
/r/MensRights09/04/16 11:22 PM
1

If the no-circ movement concentrated on voluntary education and avoided mention of religion, Jewish opposition would be minimal. Are you insane? Our end plan is the banning of all forms of child circumcision. Like hell opposition would be minimal. Also, you are literally and factually wrong. In Europe? The loudest voices, and the ones people paid attention the most while trying to get circumcision banned in Germany were Jewish. California? Same. The intactivist movement is disproportionally Jewi…
/r/MensRights09/04/16 11:05 PM
1

You know that gay men are happier than straight ones, right?
/r/MensRights09/04/16 07:49 PM
1

That would only work if it weren't for the fact that Jews are some of our fiercest opponents.
/r/MensRights09/04/16 07:46 PM
1

How am I being hypocritical exactly?
/r/MensRights07/04/16 07:40 PM
1

Bye Felicia.
/r/MensRights06/04/16 06:25 PM
4

I'm circumsized and I wouldn't care about what she does or doesn't like, it's her personal tastes, and in her culture and country cut is the norm. It's the double standard that relevant here, since feminists all hate female circumcision and would probably shit bricks if you told them you prefer circumcised women.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 05:49 PM
2

The advantage of circumcision if you almost never bathe (as in an ancient desert society) is clear. That makes no fucking sense. Why would dying in a bunch of horrific ways be better than not washing your dick. Do you think it falls off or something if you don't wash it?
/r/MensRights05/04/16 05:47 PM
2

Fuck off with this shit.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 05:45 PM
1

Maybe this community is not a good fit for you? You're not an MRA.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 02:22 PM
11

Circumcision would have made less sense then than it does now. As noted by 7hunderpants, if you live in a time before the germ theory of disease you really want to avoid cutting up your body in any way. Many, many more boys would have died due to blood loss, sepsis, blood poisoning etc. than would have been saved by circumcision. In fact, apart from a higher risk of penile cancer—only if they also suffer from phimosis—circumcision doesn't confer a single health benefit that would remotely offset…
/r/MensRights05/04/16 01:07 PM
0

Because I have better things to do with my time on Reddit. Have a nice day.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 12:01 PM
0

You expect to actually have a productive discussion after such an emotional diatribe or was that just venting?
/r/MensRights05/04/16 11:59 AM
1

There are many flavours of libertarianism. The type relevant in context is pretty bad from my perspective.
/r/MensRights05/04/16 11:58 AM
0

Cheers. :)
/r/MensRights05/04/16 12:36 AM
0

That there should not be hierarchy. It's an important distinction. I haven't heard of anyone that believes hierarchies do not exist but there are always nuts in fringe politics so I'm sure they are out there.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 11:38 PM
1

Get back to work and stop looking at dicks on the internet.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 10:24 PM
1

That was only part of the argument, read it in the context it was meant i.e widespread (and relatively higher) support for capital punishment among Americans. Also, there are 19 States without it.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 10:22 PM
3

I hope you're not mistaking my intent. Depending on what he says my advice is likely to be: "can you realistically leave the country?"
/r/MensRights04/04/16 09:19 PM
3

What's your plan if she is pregnant and decides to keep it? This is something every straight man should think about.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 08:04 PM
2

The issue here is that people, including the majority of men, would agree with her. In fact, most people will not only "not care" but actively wish rape and torture upon inmates.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 07:44 PM
1

Are you seriously suggesting that the US—I'm assuming you're American—is any different in this regard? Americans are some of the most punitive, retribution-minded people among developed countries. Hence why we still have the death penalty and other horrible justice-system policies.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 07:43 PM
1

In general libertarians only accept a handful of government actions as moral; common defense, contract arbitrage and enforcement and... actually I can't remember anything else. Your OP read more as lib than anarchist because that's a step further and entails all sorts of beliefs about hierarchy etc.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 07:08 PM
1

Libertarians generally question the legitimacy of state action.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 06:54 PM
0

My point was that your original comment was too vague. [...] while simultaneously supporting governmental legislation elsewhere. Here it reads as if you're against legislation of any kind.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 06:07 PM
-6

Wanna bet what you're proposing here is a false dichotomy? Saying they support "governmental legislation elsewhere" is pretty vague. Are you some kind of libertarian?
/r/MensRights04/04/16 03:02 PM
–

Just because no one will "take them seriously" doesn't mean they're wrong. MRAs should know that better than most.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 03:00 PM
7

From your perspective yes, because this idea traditionalism was the greatest cause of male suffering is simply bullocks [...] Greatest source of anthrogenic male suffering. Of course, it depends on what your personal definition of "traditionalism" is here. I define it as culturally inherited survival-based values as opposed to modern, emerging thrift-based ones. [...] those who would rather whine than create. Why am I not surprised that this is your perspective. What are you going to tell me nex…
/r/MensRights04/04/16 02:59 PM
4

Traditionalism is the single greatest source of anthropogenic male suffering in human history and only in recent history has this paradigm begun to change. Sounds to me like you want to enslave us again.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 02:45 PM
12

You're not a slave if you're actually the head of your house and have respect from your wife, but that takes work so nvm. You sound like a traditionalist, which is something the neither the world, nor men, need more of.
/r/MensRights04/04/16 02:29 PM
1

Feel free to fuck right off.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 10:04 PM
–

This is vile. Like literally monstrous. It seems like the only way you can get sympathy as a man is to get your limbs blown off in a war or doing something else "heroic". For men, humanity is something that must be earned. Sometimes it feels like I'm the only person around me that even sees male suffering as an inherently bad thing, without qualifiers.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 05:39 AM
2

You're a perfect candidate for involuntary organ donation.
/r/MensRights31/03/16 12:07 AM
6

Thank you.
/r/MensRights28/03/16 05:43 AM
2

Ah, I see. You're an idiot. Don't mind me; get on with it.
/r/MensRights21/03/16 05:12 PM
1

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/
/r/MensRights21/03/16 11:48 AM
3

I'll never understand Americans' neuroses about wearing proper swimming gear; instead you wear these massive potato sacks that become water-logged when wet and feel like you're dragging a drowned body behind you. I don't know if it's the typical cultural American fear of the male body or that American men are just more insecure for some bizarre reason.
/r/MensRights11/03/16 06:22 PM
4

No one here wants you to hate your penis or feel like the enemy, we just want boys to have their right to bodily integrity protected the same way girls are. For the record, I'm intact, my husband is circumcised. I'm not some cut penis hater and you'd be surprised to find that most of the posters on this thread, and on /r/MensRights as whole are actually circumcised American men.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 06:44 AM
1

Idc what parts form into from a fetus but end result, foreskin does not equal clitoris And you base this on what, exactly?
/r/MensRights03/03/16 06:34 AM
5

I can't "join you in the good fight" when circumcision is brought up because I am not bitter about it. I didn't realise you had to be personally bitter about a rights violation to be against it. As gay man I'm never going to be dealing with divorce or family courts that are biased against me because of my sex. Maybe I should just stop caring about whether straight men get fucked over by the system? You need to learn some empathy.
/r/MensRights03/03/16 06:30 AM
3

How is that relevant to the ethical/rights violations and harm inflicted by infant circumcision?
/r/MensRights03/03/16 06:29 AM
7

It's pretty damn relevant. It's yet another instance of feminism doing away with women's social responsibilities yet relying on men's duty to support women's unsustainable behavior.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 07:04 PM
8

I don't, but I also would not say that because someone is physically unattractive they have no or low value. They might no have low value as human beings, but they certainly have less value as mates, which is the whole point of the comment you're quoting. If you're going to get offended, at least do it in context.
/r/MensRights28/02/16 06:33 PM
9

They are, just as poor men are low value mates. In what world do you live in that every person is an equally desirable partner?
/r/MensRights28/02/16 06:16 PM
3

Actuaaaally... She no longer uses the $, she just goes by Kesha now.
/r/MensRights26/02/16 02:12 PM
1

Ah I see. My bad.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 08:49 PM
5

The prevalence of circumcision among american Males is currently <79%. The *incidence* is currently about >54%. They're different things; one measures how many males are circumcised out of the entire population, the other mentions how many males are currently being circumcised in a specific time period—usually in a yearly basis.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 07:35 PM
1

You're both confusing different things. Prevalence vs. incidence.
/r/MensRights23/02/16 07:26 PM
5

Holy fuck. Is this the first MR-associated group to win a high level victory legal such as this? I mean, we are all familiar with NCFM; hell, I routinely refer men that are looking into potential legal options for a wrongful cirucmcision lawsuit to Steven Svoboda. Genuinely exciting.
/r/MensRights20/02/16 06:34 PM
5

Fuck off.
/r/MensRights20/02/16 08:27 AM
2

Straight people have no idea how sexual dynamics between men work. They have absolutely no cultural or intuitive basis to frame it.
/r/MensRights17/02/16 04:27 AM
5

this MENS rights. that ain't a man. Presumably he has a Y chromosome and identifies as male. That makes him a man. BUT all that goes away when the cunt says fuck it i'm done and abandons his kids. OK, so maybe you're new to this whole men's rights thing so I won't yell at you. It's called legal parental surrender and it's part of the MR platform.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 05:19 AM
3

This is the man MR should be talking about. Not that asshole that left the country to avoid child support and alimony. We can talk about both. You should be showing empathy for a man that felt he had to uproot his whole life in order to not be saddle with the result of someone else's choice.
/r/MensRights09/02/16 04:29 AM
1

Feel free to shoot me any questions if you're having having trouble with finding particular argument or with locating sources.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 05:12 PM
2

You'll have to get the pro-circumcision opinion somewhere else. I could not do it justice as I have direct knowledge that would undermine any point I'm trying to make. However, when you do find it, remember this video, as it provides context and nuance for many of the statistics cited. I would have a look at a pro argument and then research the anti reply. A good example is the claim that circumcision reduced urinary tract infections by 10% in males. That seems to be true. Except few if any pro-…
/r/MensRights07/02/16 01:53 PM
2

You don't know anything about it he subject apart from what you've been fed by our fucked up culture. Either that or you haven't thought about the subject very deeply. If you're more horrified by FGC than MGC, you need to think about which one causes more suffering.
/r/MensRights06/02/16 01:01 PM
–

Basically the same as MGC in the US. Genital mutilation is generally passed down from same-sex parent to child—the single most significant predictor of whether a boy will be mutilated is the circumcision status of the father. The overwhelming majority of anti-circumcision activists in the US are women and in the last decade or so intactivists have shifted towards trying to reach women and expectant mothers. Trying to directly appeal to circumcised men is mostly a loss cause, the easiest way to r…
/r/MensRights05/02/16 09:20 AM
1

Sorry, which of his rights is being violated?
/r/MensRights04/02/16 07:08 PM
2

That's out of the scope of the movement. We've never claimed to be a gender rights movement; we're a men's rights movement and nothing else. We deal with problems that men face for being men. It might seem arbitrary but there's clear distinction. Issues that affect gay men because they're gay men, are addressed, those that are simply due to them being homosexual are not.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 05:54 PM
12

I absolutely expect people that I'm going to be associated with to share my values on men's human rights in a movement dedicated to men's human rights. I don't care if MRAs are politically left or right. Whether they're Christians or atheists, whether they are vegetarians or hunters, hate or love guns. Think gay marriage is wrong or right or have different views in immigration, capital punishment, abortion etc. But you damn well better respect men's human rights and care about male suffering. No…
/r/MensRights04/02/16 05:38 PM
–

What? Fuck no it's not better. Hygiene is a poor reason, but at least it's a rational one if you assume that intact genitals are as bothersome as people from circumcising cultures believe. It's also due to ignorance, which can be remedied. Projecting your sexual preferences onto infants and saying that all males must be mutilated into whatever makes your dick hard not only shows a lack of empathy---as opposed to edcuation---it's creepy as hell.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 05:25 PM
5

Transmen and gay men are sorely underrepresented basically everywhere so I do think that a good MRA movement is positive. As sillymod said, we're "underrepresented" because we're a tiny percentage of the population. On a population graph all trans people combined amount to a rounding error and even gay men are barely a tiny bump. Also, for the record, sexual minorities—and specially bisexual men—are actually massively overrepresented in this subreddit according to the surveys.
/r/MensRights04/02/16 05:01 PM
6

But hey, sure, we can always use some more infighting in the manosphere, that'll surely help our common cause /s What common cause? I'm an MRA because I care about men and want to reduce male suffering around the world. What the fuck do I care, as a gay guy, about picking up women?
/r/MensRights04/02/16 04:56 PM
–

Creates education fund for struggling white boys; insists all male children should be genitally mutilated. Ehhhh....
/r/MensRights04/02/16 04:50 PM
3

About 1% of males will suffer from phimosis by the time they're adults. This is not to be confused with developmental phimosis, which is the natural state of the penis in young children, where the foreskin is fused to the head of the penis by synechia, not unlike how your nail is adhered to your finger and will slowly separate over time. (They have to rip this tissue apart before circumcision, by the way. usually done by introducing a probe into the foreskin and circling it around the glans to b…
/r/MensRights03/02/16 05:34 PM
3

There are cases where the skin around the head of the penis is too tight and can not be pulled back. Do you actually know how common this is?
/r/MensRights03/02/16 05:35 AM
19

It can be that and also be true. Genital mutilation hardly needs help to look bad.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 07:45 AM
0

What if it was your daughter?
/r/MensRights02/02/16 07:42 AM
4

This is not even true in the slightest. They just don't give a fuck about boys or men so fail to research what genital mutilation around the world entails.
/r/MensRights02/02/16 07:40 AM
2

Hah. You're talking about a society where genital mutilation is endemic. Do you expect the law, and its application, to be fair and unbiased towards sex?
/r/MensRights01/02/16 10:10 PM
2

Of course, it's unlikely to pass and doesn't take away from their oppression points.
/r/MensRights31/01/16 12:17 AM
1

I'd be more than willing to donate towards funding it; that said, I wouldn't pay for streaming simply because I wouldn't be able to take advantage of it due to timezone differences.
/r/MensRights31/01/16 12:15 AM
1

How many millions, exactly? And what about them? There are civilian casualties in war, some of those will be children. This is inevitable. Whether you think the war they participated in was justified or not—a lot of those vets will be Viet Nam, Gulf War vets etc—it is our responsibility as a society to care for our warriors, because we need them to protect us. It is a fair and necessary social contract. For militaries to function and be effective, soldiers need to do as they are told; an army ca…
/r/MensRights30/01/16 01:25 AM
1

Oh no, won't someone think of the poor womminz. Fuck off.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 01:15 AM
3

Women vote for their own collective interests; men don't. Men are, at best, apathetic towards other men and quite often actively antagonistic. Most of men's sympathy and concern is directed towards women, not each other.
/r/MensRights30/01/16 12:12 AM
14

Men also produce basically everything that keeps our advanced civilisation from crumbling—not to mention every advance that adds to human progress. That includes the germ theory of disease that's lowered child mortality and every other scientific discovery that has allowed the human race to reach 7 billion. The fruit of men's labour has saved a lot more lives than men's violence has taken.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 11:16 PM
1

I love how openly racist this sub is, must be so awkward for nonwhite MRAs (if they exist) to read through these comments. We're not overly sensitive pussies, so no.
/r/MensRights28/01/16 11:16 PM
7

Foregen is going the scaffolding/grafting route last I heard.
/r/MensRights27/01/16 04:14 AM
1

Vulvar vestibulitis.
/r/MensRights26/01/16 01:06 AM
4

VVS, for one.
/r/MensRights25/01/16 12:43 PM
14

That's assumed. Did you know that doctors perform female circumcisions for medical reasons sometimes? No one assumes people want that banned when activists call for an end to female genital cutting. It's kind of silly
/r/MensRights25/01/16 12:24 PM
0

For people here that get worked up about feminists, look at the comments in that article. Most of them written by average, non-feminist men. The world is complicated.
/r/MensRights17/01/16 11:39 AM
1

See my reply to TornotoIntactivist above please.
/r/MensRights15/01/16 12:20 AM
1

This. Have her watch this. You should probably watch it too. Trust me, it's worth it. However, if you'd like specific citations or papers to support a particular point, please PM me. I'm fairly knowledgeable about the subject.
/r/MensRights15/01/16 12:20 AM
1

When you appeal to politics you create division, because regardless of how passionate, most people are complex and care about more than one thing. I am a vocal advocate for men and boys. And I do my best to actually walk the walk. But that's not the only thing I am. I'm also Hispanic and from a working class background. I'm not going to vote for a racist asshat. I'm not going to vote for someone that will dismantle Obama's healthcare scheme after my mother finally found affordable health insuran…
/r/MensRights13/01/16 07:40 PM
1

Yes the neo atheists are clinging to her, did you see her interview with Sam Harris? No. It's interesting that you mention him however, since even lefty atheists hate him now for being "Islamophobic".
/r/MensRights12/01/16 06:09 AM
3

I feel like the neo athiest movement just clings to her because a black female ex Muslim makes them look good. I find the "New Atheist" label so amusing. When you finally corner someone into explaining to you what it means you'll get lots of tripe about them being strident, anti-theistic, belligerent etc. Never mind that none of this is new, but the irony is that if it might seem that way, is because of centuries of persecution where voicing the opinions that we now can in the post-Christian wor…
/r/MensRights12/01/16 06:00 AM
2

Answer me something, is there or is there not a consensus that women have been oppressed throughout history?
/r/MensRights08/01/16 10:37 PM
1

You're simply denying science like a creationist in favour of ideology. Some people say exactly the same about the patriarchy and male oppression of women. Everyone's got scientific consensus and the light of truth at their back on the internet. Unclench your butthole dude.
/r/MensRights08/01/16 09:52 PM
1

I never claimed that "savages" were peaceful, just egalitarian. Maybe at least try reading more than the title of texts? Chagnon's work in particular is relevant because male Yanomamö social behaviour, which cannot be described as anything resembling "egalitarian". But as I expected, you cited the usual suspects with very definitive and dismissive language. [Brian Ferguson] This more or less reveals which side of the debate you stand on as well as your willingness to consider my point of view. I…
/r/MensRights08/01/16 09:17 PM
1

I think you really need to read the other side of that as-of-yet not settled argument, I would read Napoleon Chagnon's body of work on the Yanomamö and Steven Pinker's Better Angels of our Nature. Also War Before Civilization: the Myth of the Peaceful Savage by Lawrence H. Keeley. Pinker and Chagnon in particular have been widely criticised, but that's just the nature of academia and in this instance I personally believe it to be political. Either way, I do find their evidence more compelling th…
/r/MensRights08/01/16 08:11 PM
1

Men want to live in comfort too with conveniences Women want convenience, safety and peace. Men risk their lives at rates much higher than women, even when they don't need to. This is an established fact. Men take risks, engage in competitive behaviour, physical violence, rigid hierarchical posturing etc. Why do they do this?
/r/MensRights08/01/16 06:57 PM
1

You've gone on a tangent. Can we get back to how men's only reason for creating anything of value is women?
/r/MensRights08/01/16 04:59 PM
1

If women had never even existed [...] Neither would men as we know them. We evolved side by side; men's nature is determined by women's and women's by men because men's evolution was shaped by women's and women's by men. That's what men do even when women are not around. They might continue to act out typical male bahviours in the absence of women, but they do so following evolutionary imperatives that emerged in the presence of and due to women. Distinctive human male traits e.g competitiveness…
/r/MensRights08/01/16 04:26 PM
2

Men still invent, maintain, build and repair everything, thus 'run' everything, but mostly to make women happy. That makes men slaves, not powerful. It's also not a recent development. Men have been sacrificing themselves and working to impress women since the dawn of history. Feminism, in your world view, is just another instance of men giving women what they want in a very long line of them. Also, in that context, if everything men have ever done, they've done for women that makes women ultima…
/r/MensRights08/01/16 03:33 PM
8

Targeted advertising is very important. As an example, there are HIV testing and prevention fliers all over gay sex-on-premises places. A generic "everyone should practise safe sex!" ad would be a lot less effective than the specific ones which address the circumstances of gay men and HIV in the gay community. Also, ads targeting women in this context are already ubiquitous.
/r/MensRights08/01/16 03:26 PM
1

I'm just having some fun.
/r/MensRights08/01/16 03:25 PM
1

99% of all of society's problems are due to the corrosive, cancerous effects of 50 years of Feminism. This means that according to you, in only 50 years women have been able to completely remodel society. And men, despite—as you continue to write—being in charge of everything seem utterly powerless to stop it. You can't change society without power, so either women hold more power than you believe or men changed it for them. Which one is it?
/r/MensRights08/01/16 03:11 PM
1

You have all these complains about society and the changing gender roles, which I assume you believe prejudice men. So how did we arrive at this point?
/r/MensRights08/01/16 02:26 PM
1

It's interesting how you assume I'm female. Answer me something: how have we arrived to this point, when men are physically stronger than women, control all economies, miliataries etc?
/r/MensRights08/01/16 02:13 PM
1

What are men?
/r/MensRights08/01/16 02:04 PM
1

Are you on fucking drugs mate?
/r/MensRights08/01/16 01:44 PM
2

You just need to be extremely more selective about who you have them with. Yeah that doesn't work. People lie, and they change. Or adopt. Surrogacy if you want to have your own is a good alternative.
/r/MensRights04/01/16 06:50 AM
0

Fuck off.
/r/MensRights02/01/16 10:18 AM
1

Do you know what anecdotal evidence means? Lets break down the logic chain for you: Weight lifting makes people stronger The majority of men do not lift weight or perform comparable actions Any man that lifts weights will be stronger than the average man
/r/MensRights02/01/16 09:23 AM
0

Uh huh. Cause that proves anything or is in any way relevant. Jesus.
/r/MensRights02/01/16 08:47 AM
3

people maybe... men? I doubt it. Any man that does any kind of weightlifting would be stronger than the average man. Basic statistical distribution.
/r/MensRights02/01/16 08:30 AM
0

"Strong" is a relative word; if he's stronger than the overwhelming majority of people, which he would be, then he's "strong".
/r/MensRights02/01/16 07:11 AM
1

I'm strongly against child genital mutilation.
/r/MensRights30/12/15 03:12 AM
0

Human history in this context means after the appearance of writing and the onset of recorded history. The period you mention would be part of prehistory; and yes there's evidence that prehistoric humans practised all kinds of genital mutilation.
/r/MensRights29/12/15 05:44 AM
1

You have a .gov and a pseudo legit academic source? These are high quality, peer-reviewed papers published in respected journals. Regardless of how flawed, the scientific method and academic research is the best way we've got to investigate reality. Personal anecdotes, tabloid articles and edgy books can't even come close. Do you know what's even more hilarious? These papers have both been posted in /r/MensRights before and received positively by the community. These results have gone on to beco…
/r/MensRights29/12/15 05:01 AM
1

And your research is biased bullshit. I linked you to an academic paper, and you say it's findings are invalid because of a book written by a journalist? And the freaking Dailymail. Do you think the cited findings above just came out of nowhere? No previous foundation, no supporting research? It is in fact a reaffirmation of earlier findings.
/r/MensRights29/12/15 04:09 AM
1

Details that you don't have and cannot provide. Did you miss the part where the thanked me for my help and said my posts were helpful? I've counselled, listened to and help hundreds of men dealing with emotional issues as a result of their circumcision. I know exactly what he's feeling, because I heard similar words from my own husband and many of the men that have since become my friends. Circumcision is my point of focus as a men's right activist, I am very well informed on the subject and hav…
/r/MensRights29/12/15 03:16 AM
2

What I hope is that you find a way to help you heal from all the emotional abuse you've endured throughout your life. When someone sees compassion and protectiveness as manipulation, it makes me think that those are the only circumstances under which they've been exposed to those things in a very long time. Tell me something; of all those people and circumstances that "toughened you up", did any of them also make you feel loved and appreciated not for how useful you could be or what you could do…
/r/MensRights29/12/15 01:18 AM
2

You didn't give him shit. You told him to man up.
/r/MensRights29/12/15 12:53 AM
1

Men need to be challenged and confronted. If you want to quit reddit because of assholes like me, then quit. That is such myopic bullshit. A perfect example of the problem. Men need to be confronted? The entire history of the human race is one of men being "confronted". Of "adversarial arguments", shaming and emotional abuse. No one has ever done anything but confront, badger and manipulate men into being useful and self-sacrificial. To even imply that men are too coddled and what they actually …
/r/MensRights29/12/15 12:51 AM
2

Same to you. I also wanted to say something else to you: You're not broken. The scar around your penis does not define who you are as a man or as a person. It's only a reflection of the fucked up world around you and it is your choice whether you accept that ugliness into yourself and let it control who you become in the future. Also some advice: don't hate your dick OK? It might be a little banged up but I'd bet that it still does its best to rise and do its job without complaint.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 04:59 AM
1

[...] that doesn't care one little bit whether or not I survive it. You're not alone either. If you ever need to talk, there are people who will listen and care.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 04:46 AM
1

Sorry OP, I've been blowing up at the dicks commenting here and have neglected your question. The foreskin restoration forum has plenty of discussion from men dealing with all aspects of circumcision. It's focused on restoration but there's other sections too. This is the Reddit Intactivist community. Feel free to post about anything there, whether personal or otherwise. The guys and girls there are very well informed and could answer most questions you might have Unfortunately I can't recommend…
/r/MensRights28/12/15 04:18 AM
0

So, you're saying he should commit suicide? I'm saying that your advice is not helpful or relevant and you should not have commented the way you did. OP came in here asking for resources to help him—that reminds me, I need to send him some links. He's already looking for help. You telling him to "man up" and deal with it is worse than useless and counterproductive.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 04:01 AM
1

Absolutely. If you can stomach the thought of being seen by a surgeon that specialises in doing circumcisions or circumcision "corrections" i.e. fixing botched circs. It also depends on how much skin you were left with from your circumcision.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 03:57 AM
1

No, not foreskin restoration surgery. Just to tidy up the scar line, get rid of any discoloration, hypertrophic scarring etc.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 03:51 AM
1

That said, would you rather not get over it and have trouble coping for the rest of your life? Some problems can't be fixed by getting over them. A guy "getting over" the fact he can't see his kids won't actually put him any closer to seeing them, nor will it improve the lives of the hundreds of other men like him out there in any way. OP might learn to be at peace with his circumstances, but that doesn't mean it'll actually get him his whole dick back, nor will it mean that millions of kids wil…
/r/MensRights28/12/15 03:49 AM
5

I've listened to a lot of men over the years talk about their experience with emotional issues due to circumcision. Without exception, every single one that has ever gone seeking professional help from an American professional has been either mocked, belittled or had their problems purposely misattributed to something else. I'm not saying that anyone should eschew intervention from a mental health professional, but it's not that simple. Also, going by the rest of your post, it sounds to me like …
/r/MensRights28/12/15 03:42 AM
0

But isn't the goal to get over it? Got accused of rape and got kicked out of uni? Get over it. Wife took your kid and now you can't see them? Just get over it. Stuck paying alimony and child support? Get the fuck over it. Your girlfriends beats the shit out of you every day but you're afraid if you leave her she'll hurt the kids instead? You know the drill buddy. Fuck trying to help anyone or make anything better. Just man up dude; and if you fail, feel free to eat a shotgun or hang yourself lik…
/r/MensRights28/12/15 03:37 AM
7

My circumcision doesn't bother me This is not about you, you selfish piece of shit. Why in the world would you come into the thread of a man asking to be referred to a support group for people struggling with the same issue and make it all about you? No one gives a fuck about how successful you are or how big your dick is. Fuck this shit. I need to get off Reddit for a while, I'm starting to believe straight men deserve all the fucking crap that's been heaped upon you. So many of you have no fuc…
/r/MensRights28/12/15 03:27 AM
1

In summation, quit acting like such a pussy. Stop acting like a crusty old fuck.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 02:49 AM
1

Whatever dude, my life's too awesome to spend on this shit. Thanks for inspiring me to get off Reddit. I think I'm going to go and suck my guy's dick now.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 02:20 AM
1

Feel free not not to be a discourteous cunt to people that are trying to have a conversation with you. Old people have been decrying the flaws of the younger generation for thousands of years. And they have been wrong virtually every single time. Graphed a long enough timeline, each generation is better than the last by practically every metric. This generation of "pussies" you're mocking, will bring the Earth into an age of greater prosperity, scientific and technological breakthroughs you can'…
/r/MensRights28/12/15 02:17 AM
1

What the hell does that even mean? Are we being invaded by aliens?
/r/MensRights28/12/15 02:10 AM
1

I think there are a lot more pussies in the millennial generation and I don't consider that progress. Like your great-grandparents' generation thought that there were a lot more kids listening to rock music?
/r/MensRights28/12/15 02:08 AM
1

The circumcision rate in the US is 54% and falling. The US will soon join Canada and Australia as the latest of the anglophones countries to abandon infant circumcision. Also, stop selling me bridges—I've got better things to do with my money. What a silly, obnoxious phrase; were you born in 1965?
/r/MensRights28/12/15 02:00 AM
1

My scar is very dark and is just fucked up and so uneven. It is disfiguring. Have you considered plastic surgery as a means of correcting this prior or restoration? It could mean it'd take longer to achieve the results you desire, but might be worth it. That said, once restored the scar will roll under and won't be visible unless the penis is erect.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 01:19 AM
9

This is not an appropriate response to men seeking support avenues for something they are struggling to cope with. Telling guys to man up is as effective as telling a depressed person to smile. I would hope if some guy came in here asking to be referred to support groups for dads struggling with being separated from their kids your response wouldn't be "stop acting like a victim and go get a dog instead." I am disappointing by this comment. As I've said in the past, if you straight men can't eve…
/r/MensRights28/12/15 01:18 AM
9

[...] since an estimated 5% of rapes ever result in a conviction. Yeah, I would really like to see where these numbers got pulled from. Only 18% of cases reported result in a conviction. And how do we know this a bad thing, without context?
/r/MensRights28/12/15 01:05 AM
1

What you consider to be the worst type of female genital cutting, where the external genitalia are excised and the vaginal opening is sewn together into a narrow opening, is the rarest form of FGC outside of some forms of Type IV—which is defined as any kind of damage or injury to the female genitalia. It is dishonest of you to compare male genital cutting as practised in the United States to infibulation. Why not compare it instead to subincision, another form of MGC where the penis is split op…
/r/MensRights28/12/15 12:59 AM
1

And you're a cunt. No one's perfect.
/r/MensRights28/12/15 12:49 AM
1

The two definitions are the system of government/law that favors male lineage, and then there is the cultural practice of descending from male lineage. Which is perfectly acceptable, hence not the definition of "patriarchy" people here are probably constesting. How is circumcision not a practice that is mostly defined by male lineage (aka patriarchal lineage)? Did I say it wasn't? What I said was that the origins weren't patriarchal, in the feminist sense Male genital mutilation is passed down f…
/r/MensRights27/12/15 11:51 PM
1

How are make and female circumcision different?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 11:09 PM
1

And that's irrelevant. Because they didn't create it, they simply inherited from hunted gatherers tens of thousands of years in the past. Also, it seems we're operating under different definitions of the word patriarchy here. There's the historical definition, which is that men are head of the family and command public authority and there's the feminist version, where patriarchy is a system set up by men to benefit men as a whole to the detriment or outright oppression of women. There's nothing …
/r/MensRights27/12/15 11:08 PM
1

Well, for starters, because you're wrong. Circumcision and other forms of genital mutilation, both male and female, are tens of thousands of years old. Started out in sub-Saharan Africa as rights of passage for both young men and women. When religious rules about male circumcision would have been formalised, both in Islam and among proto-Jews, they would have already been practising it; it would have already from Africa through Egypt and the Levant a long time in the past.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 11:00 PM
1

That's not an analogy, it's a direct comparison of two identical situations. What makes you different from that Somali girl, and what makes the parents of the boys around you that were mutilated different from her mother? Do you think it's a healthy state of mind to be resentful that your parents chose not to reduce and cripple one of your primary sex organs? You are actually sad that your dick is not a dried out, scarred, insensitive mess.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 10:51 PM
1

Why should I hate women? They have no power over me one way or the other. They're a peripheral part of my life at best. Can we get back to how you honestly believe patriarchy is a thing?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 10:43 PM
1

You're wrong about that as well. Infibulation is the rarest of the main types.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 10:42 PM
1

As if protesting is the only thing we do. In fact, it's a minor part of our efforts. I don't see what reason there is to be so jaded when we are winning. It's silly.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 10:40 PM
1

That said you're also not alone. We're all in this together. * fistbump *
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:58 PM
1

Hence why I removed it and left a note as way of apology. I could have just as well not said anything. Also, you can't compare your own sensation to someone else's. That can only be done by a third party, preferably with measuring equipment.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:55 PM
1

True as that may be, it is also true that history is any indication, women will not help you and we can't. You've got to help each other.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:53 PM
1

Sure. We should be more respectful of women that make false rape accusations too. Maybe respect the choices of women that beat their husbands while we are at it. Why even have this club if we're not going to actually stand for anything? We'd be a very poor rights movements if we didn't actually care about men's and boy's rights.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:38 PM
1

No form of female circumcision that I know of digs out the whole clitoris, whose structure is mostly internal. Do you even know that there's more than one type of female genital mutilation, just as there is more than one type of male genital mutilation? And yes, I am most definitely comparing them. Why is it OK for Americans go mutilated their sons to make their genitals more attractive but not OK for Egyptians to do the same to their daughters?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:31 PM
3

I'm gay. Never touched a woman, never will. If women choose to keep the kid, they better be able to afford it. Child support needs to die. One way or another the current status quo won't last. All it'll take is a viable male birth control and men will be able to take their reproductive rights back.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:29 PM
1

Sure, it's your right to breathe too. What a banal statement. Why are you posting in a place you'll get nothing but hate?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:26 PM
1

It's certainly not because straight men don't want to. The male sexual appetite is practically infinite when encouraged. Gay men are about 2% of the population; it's not easy for us to encounter each other outside of hook-up apps or designated pick-up spots. For a heterosexual person, everyone of the opposite sex you see around you can be safely assumed to be a potential sex partner. It's not so for us. Yet gay guys still have casual sex in toilets, parks, offices, elevators, car parks. I won't …
/r/MensRights27/12/15 12:43 PM
1

Variations on that theme are plastered over this subreddit and all over the place by seduction and redpill guys. I'm familiar with the hypothesis. I should have chosen something less ambiguous. That said, I'd hope every guy here would rise above that, if it were true. Because if that's what being a straight man amounts to then maybe you deserve all the shit you're coping in the gender wars. Why should I care about you when you can't care about each other?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 12:28 PM
1

What you describe doesn't sound like normal male sexual function. Here's some stuff to read: Non-therapeutic adult circumcision study Comparative measurement of fine-touch sensitivity Cross-sectional partner survey Large correlational self-report study I think these all link to the full papers but if not let me know and I'll get you some full copies. EDITED TO REMOVE MEANNESS. On a re-read I thought my post was too unnecessarily confrontational and maybe even cruel. If you saw that before I apol…
/r/MensRights27/12/15 12:26 PM
1

Even in Africa, where persistent complications occur more frequently, they are still far less common than those associated with FGM. I'd like to see some citations please. As to sexual pleasure, which is by far the least compelling argument against FGM, there absolutely is evidence that FGM (esp. of type II and III) can affect sexual pleasure. I'd like to see these as well. I'm comparing the circumcision that actually occurs in women to the circumcision that actually occurs in men The average ma…
/r/MensRights27/12/15 11:55 AM
0

Yeah we can both agree on that at this point. There's nothing to be gained here. I'll be keeping an eye out for your posts on r/MensRights in the future.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 10:22 AM
-1

Why do I always allow myself to get pulled into engaging with idiots.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 10:21 AM
3

No, it's not. I speak several languages. Would you like to switch to one you would feel more comfortable with? Going by your reticence I'm obviously not understanding your point. You said: [...] but the idea that it's against the infant's consent is the least compelling. My reply: How about the argument from human rights and the right to self-ownership? To which you replied: That's the same argument. Are you or are you not claiming that the argument from consent is the same as the argument from …
/r/MensRights27/12/15 10:12 AM
-1

Disagreeing with you on anything whatsoever is equal to genocide. You seem to understand what analogies are but somehow don't understand what their purpose is. How is that even possible? It's a hypothetical. Make believe. It serves no purpose except to elucidate a point by providing two points of reference.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 10:07 AM
3

Consent is the worst argument. I am perceptive to many arguments against circumcision, but the idea that it's against the infant's consent is the least compelling. You said the argument from consent is not a good one. Then I made an appeal to human rights and you said they were the same. Can you elaborate how they're the same?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:56 AM
1

Firstly, you're comparing the complications of rural female circumcision in Africa to medical circumcision in the west. That is so dishonest that I hope you didn't think to differentiate. These are complications of traditional male African circumcision. Every year in South Africa, circumcision ceremonies leaves hundreds of young men injured and dozens dead. We have the most data out of South Africa for obvious reasons. We have no fucking clue about what happens in the rest of tribal Africa. Mayb…
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:55 AM
-1

So, if someone agrees with 90% of what you say, they are ignorant for not agreeing completely. If someone agrees with you that Anglos should not be killed for fun, Hispanics should not be killed, South East Asians should not be killed, East Asians should not be killed, Sub-Saharan Africans should not be killed, Arabs—not killed. Also the Chinese, Japanese and Europeans should definitely not be killed. But they believe that Polynesians are absolutely free game and should be hunted like animals fo…
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:41 AM
1

I'm gay, those little status signaling insults don't have any effect on me—for obvious reasons. Can we get back to how you believe patriarchy is a thing?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:34 AM
2

You said that kids couldn't consent. Are you saying that the also should not have rights? That seems like two arguments two me.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:33 AM
2

Although, I am sorry about your botched cut. Any idea what percentage of cases this happens to? No one knows. The rate of circumcision complications has been quoted as anything from 0.02% percent to 20%. Most studies look at different things, none that I know actually follow kids into adulthood. So complications like his would not be part of any study. Interesting enough, despite this fact certain American health organisations still consider circumcision to more benefits than disadvantages, in o…
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:30 AM
2

What about earlobes? Can they cut those off?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:08 AM
1

nothing will be done by anyone. The anti-circumcision movement in the US is stronger than ever and growing every day, even as circumcision rates in the US keep dropping. I wouldn't be so pessimistic.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:08 AM
2

While infrequent there are enough medical reasons it becomes neccessary to remove the foreskin. Less than 1% of adult men will go on to suffer from phimosis and most of them except cases where there is severe scarring of the preputial sphincter will be treatable without surgery at all or with minor plastic surgery in the worst cases. All other reasons to circumcision are so rare that they don't even bare mentioning.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:07 AM
2

Yeah this is true, people have been trying to demonstrate it one way or the other for a long time, and generally there is no real change. You're wrong. I challenge you to find studies of equal quality saying otherwise. Non-therapeutic adult circumcision study Comparative measurement of fine-touch sensitivity Cross-sectional partner survey Large correlational self-report study
/r/MensRights27/12/15 09:01 AM
1

If you don't believe men deserve the same human rights as women, why are you on this subreddit?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:58 AM
1

Everything you said is wrong. There's four types of female genital cutting, plus type 1a and only pharaonic circumcision is unarguably worse than foreskin/frenulum excision.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:57 AM
2

How does that work again?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:55 AM
2

People that cut off their daughters clits and labia thinks it looks nicer too.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:54 AM
1

I might even do the same to my children one day. Does that mean you'll circumcise your daughters too?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:53 AM
1

The foreskin is certainly more functional than any part of the external female genitalia save for the clitoris and even that is arguable as the female orgasm is not directly involved in the reproductive process. The foreskin is the most fine-touch sensitive part of the penis. In fact, it contains practically all of the fine-touch mechanoreceptors in the penis so excising it destroys the penis ability to perceive small textures and rapid changes in texture, the same way the tip of our fingers do,…
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:53 AM
1

Why is it that some people are so passionate about male circumcision? Why are some people so passionate about female circumcision? There's hundreds of organisations dedicated to fighting it.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:52 AM
1

So you are flat out denying that patriarchy is a real thing? Yes. At no point in human history have men lead better lives than women.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:51 AM
1

That surgery also means that your penis can't rise when erect. Not worth it, or recommended.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:48 AM
1

Firstly, most guys think fat women are gross. All female children should have their adipose tissue destroyed as they grow up so they can maintain an attractive body fat percentage. Labia? Most look like disgusting meat flaps. Men like the tidy pornstar look. Any breast size below DDs is not even worth bothering with. I'm going to be shaming my daughter about her bust size as she grows up so she gets implants like all of her friends. No guy's going to want to marry her otherwise.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:44 AM
3

Men shouldn't be responsible for women's choices. If women choose to have children they either need to support it or hope the state will.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:39 AM
4

Consent is the worst argument. How about the argument from human rights and the right to self-ownership? Parents are guardians of their children, not their owners. The child still has rights.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:34 AM
4

As an adult i am incredibly thankful this was done prior to me having memory. That assumes that it would need to be done at all. If your parents had left you with a whole penis, you would love it like the overwhelming majority of intact men do. The argument of consent is poor. Infants and children receive many immunizations they do not consent too either. Why instead of immunisations, which are beneficial, do you not instead compare it to say, tattoos, piercings or castration? How much of their …
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:33 AM
-1

If you want to win people over, they should not be dismissed unless you believe they're a lost cause and the effort put towards winning them over would better be used somewhere else. But just because bringing people over to your point of view requires you you to play nice doesn't mean you have to respect their views, you just have to make them feel like you do. It goes without saying that you should also maintain an open mind yourself. At the same time suppressing dissent also has it's place. Do…
/r/MensRights27/12/15 08:27 AM
1

Cultures. Genital mutilation started out in Sub-Saharan Africa, it's older than human history and it's been practised by tribes all over the world for tens of thousands of years.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 06:28 AM
0

Which doesn't say anything about it being passed down from the father. Combined with the rest of the evidence I think it does.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 05:06 AM
1

Sure.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:36 AM
3

Non-therapeutic adult circumcision study Comparative measurement of fine-touch sensitivity Cross-sectional partner survey Large correlational self-report study
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:28 AM
1

I saw it more as playing on the stereotype of "any successful guy has a small dick" The stereotype is "guys with small dicks overcompensate with big/expensive cars". There's a difference.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:22 AM
1

It was made as a reply to someone writing about his experiences with having a small penis, which he would have had sent to his inbox. Don't you think that's a bit cruel?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:12 AM
2

You're being downvoted to hell for this, but as a kid who was made of for not being circumcised, I thank you. Did you know that in Somalia, girls that haven't gotten their clits and labia cut off get made fun of by their peers? They use the insult "girl with three legs" to shame girls that still have external genitalia. Assuming that the author's mother protected her from mutilation—she didn't, she took her daughter to be mutilated when she turned 13—would she have been wrong for having done so?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:10 AM
2

You're a disgusting excuse for a human being.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:04 AM
–

It used to be done for sanitary reasons [...] This is a myth. The oldest motives for genital cutting were purely cultural—usually as a rite of passage into manhood for both men and women. At no point in history would opening up a wound into the body have been more sanitary than just leaving the penis alone. Circumcision itself would have caused more infections, not to mention deaths from blood loss, sepsis etc. than leaving the penis alone would have.
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:04 AM
5

Call me weird, but me and my buddies used to make fun of our one friend who was un-circumcised. We'd call him turtle dick, say his GF would have to coax his dick out with a piece of lettuce, etc. Why the fuck would you do something like that? After going on this site it appears there are far more uncircumcised men than men that are cut. Why would you think that? Most of the men commenting here would be circumcised Americans, with a minority being Europeans or Canadians/Australians etc who would …
/r/MensRights27/12/15 02:00 AM
0

The joke wasn't directed at you. Nor do you have a small penis, I imagine?
/r/MensRights27/12/15 01:56 AM
1

A really hot mangina...
/r/MensRights26/12/15 11:48 PM
4

You'll get banned from the /r/anarchist subreddits too. Let the irony of that sink in.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 11:47 PM
6

That is not true. In more than one way. Firstly, different kinds of sex are more risky than others. Vaginal sex is the least risky penetrative sex there is unless you count oral. The difference in risk between being the receptive anal partner in homosexual penetration and the active partner is vaginal penetration is at least one order of magnitude, if I remember correctly. Secondly, there's prevalence. 56% percent of the people living with HIV in the US are gay men, and they account for 60% of n…
/r/MensRights26/12/15 11:01 PM
-10

Some more so than others, but it's not like most straight men have to worry about HIV like gay men do. The point is that condoms are far from a perfect solution and as long as they are the only one, the current status quo will persist. We desperately need a better one.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 08:04 PM
-2

Considering how sensitive basically all men are about penis size, what do you think?
/r/MensRights26/12/15 06:45 PM
13

Going by membership in the anti-circumcision movement, women are overwhelmingly more likely to be against it than men. Just like female circumcision is passed down from mother to daughter, male circumcision is passed down from the father. The number one determinant factor of whether a boy will be genitally cut is the genital status of the father. And that one I have citations for.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 06:30 PM
–

Your own penis won't become any bigger nor will more women pay attention to you for being cruel to other men.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 06:24 PM
–

Condoms are horrible; they destroy sensation and make many guys lose their erections. Circumcised guys in particular hate them.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 06:20 PM
-1

I already got what I wanted out of this exchange. However, if you'd like to discuss whether there's a scientific basis for gender dysphoria, please feel free to PM me. Have a good night.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 12:49 AM
-1

As for the question, sure, go ahead and say they are "now men." Well then that is good news. As Scott Alender says: it's a lot easier to change biology than society. That means that all we need is a little genetic engineering and we could potentially put an end to a lot of sex antagonism. No more transphobia (or trans people I guess), less gender wars. Obviously not all people will be convinced by this, such as those that have a religious objection and believe our "souls" are gendered or whateve…
/r/MensRights26/12/15 12:42 AM
-1

If, for some strange reason, their DNA says male but everything else says female they are neither male nor female but some sort of hermaphroditic person. What is "everything else" here? Appearance? No, after this procedure they have complete phenotype/genotype congruence. Male genes, male bodies. But they were born genetically female with female bodies. Are they now men?
/r/MensRights26/12/15 12:17 AM
2

You think the next generation after yours is on a decline in comparison to yours. Just like Plato above did. Is your generation on a decline from your parents?
/r/MensRights26/12/15 12:13 AM
-1

OK, so I asked you a question. So, in your opinion, genetic profile alone determines what a man or woman is? As in, someone with male genes should be wholly accepted as a man and someone with female genes as a woman, without extenuation? You still haven't given me an answer. Do you or do you not agree that a person should be accepted as the sex their gene says they are?
/r/MensRights26/12/15 12:08 AM
-1

I was under the impression that changing the DNA would change everything else. What do you mean by "everything else"? Public arguments are not for the participants, they are for the audience. The audience here already agrees with me, for the most part. And it's not an issue I'm invested enough in to debate for the sake of the odd lurker.
/r/MensRights26/12/15 12:05 AM
1

I am in my thirties but I am also back in school now trying to finish up my degree and you can't imagine some of the sissified nonsense that comes out of their mouths. So you are an old guy among young people. "What is happening to our young people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions. Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?" -Plato, 4th Century BC That is you. Either every generation bef…
/r/MensRights25/12/15 11:56 PM
-1

You sound like a creationist. We're not going to change each other's mind, so what's the point in getting stuck in a debate from which neither of us will benefit? I'd rather talk about something more interesting. For the sake of argument, let's say that in the future they can change a woman into a man by altering the DNA and that such a creature would, for the sake of argument, be a real man. So, in your opinion, genetic profile alone determines what a man or woman is? As in, someone with male g…
/r/MensRights25/12/15 11:52 PM
-1

And, again, you have still to present evidence that "trans men" are something other than women. I'm not interested in having that argument with you. Does that mean you are going to take them seriously today? You can't project your beliefs and premises into the future? You seem extremely sure of what a man is and a what a woman is. What is male and female. That certainty should apply regardless of whether the circumstances are hypothetical or current.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 11:39 PM
1

However I do not identify with most of the ideals I see coming from them. The 60s were supposedly defined by free love and hippie culture yet Boomers today are not even though they are the exact same generation. A lot of uninformed people say that is because they grew up and got old. The real reason? There were only ever about 200,000 to 400,000 "hippies" in the US. Do you see where I'm going with this?
/r/MensRights25/12/15 11:36 PM
0

Americas suicide rates have never been higher for ages 5-44 males. Wait, so now we're down to 5-45 males. Yet another qualifier. But it is also incorrect. At most we're at a 20-25 here high. Just like Sweden. That does not qualify as a skyrocketing rate of suicide. If graphed over time it'd just show it rising up to historical levels. The highest rates of suicide occurred decades ago.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 11:33 PM
-2

Damned if i know. You seem so certain about who is and isn't what that I assumed you had a cogent, consistent basis for judging. You seemed very sure that XY women are not actually female.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 11:24 PM
0

A rate is a measure, quantity, or frequency measured against another. Usually represented in suicide statistics as the number of suicides per 100,000 people. In that vein, and according to SAVE, the suicide rates in the US decreased from 1990-2000 from 12.5 suicides per 100,000 to 10.4 per 100,000 then increased increased to 12.1 per 100,000 during the past decade. [Here's the rate of suicide per 100,000 for a few OECD countries] (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Suicide-death…
/r/MensRights25/12/15 11:17 PM
-1

Say someone is born male, with an XY chromosome, and through genetic engineering becomes an XX female. Are they now a woman?
/r/MensRights25/12/15 11:05 PM
0

What you are stating is the opposite of what the data shows. Be specific. How are each of my claims wrong?
/r/MensRights25/12/15 11:01 PM
1

Uh huh.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:54 PM
0

The only thing that can make the rate of suicide increase is if there are more suicides. Other kinds of death do no impact this figure.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:54 PM
0

Your wife could be one of them and you wouldn't have a clue. The guy above replied that a Y chromosome is what defines what a man is. It clearly doesn't.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:49 PM
2

Protip to men: focusing on her pleasure pays dividends Who focuses on men's pleasure? Straight sex sounds like a lot of work for very shitty payback.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:48 PM
1

So they have no power. You've contradicted yourself about 4(?) times now.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:45 PM
1

Watch and see. BLM will die out and be known (or unknown) as the most pathetic waste of time for a group protest. So it's not actually a menace at all then.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:41 PM
0

If mortality declines yet one cause of mortality declines at a slower rate then it is statistically growing as a cause of death. Which is nowhere near the same as saying that the rates of suicide are increasing.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:40 PM
0

On an clear downward trend over time. Wait, I thought your argument was that "youth suicide" has never been higher? That 25 year high applies just as much in the US as Sweden. So, suicide rates are not actually higher but either remaining the same or dropping Youth suicide is spiking at the moment but are not significantly higher when compared to just a few decades ago Seems like a lot of qualifiers down from your hyperbolic; "suicide rates are skyrocketing and higher among the youth than ever b…
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:39 PM
2

Yes, because they are the vocal majority. Funny, I can't list the amount of groups I've heard being described as the "vocal minority". By every side of the political spectrum and every conceivable belief. Are we part of the vocal minority of males when we complain about all the shit men have to put up with? How many 30 year olds with jobs do you see protesting? Wait, when did protests become a bad thing? Your non-pussified grandparents protested for all kinds of things. Such as the for 40 hour w…
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:31 PM
2

I think the difference is the power. So a bunch of college kids have more power than 46% of American voters? Somehow I think that some perspective got lost in the way to that conclusion. Look at BLM Hardly a "menace to everyone". It's funny, because right now your message is reminding me of the people the picture in the OP mocks.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:20 PM
-1

I edited my reply. Read it again.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:16 PM
5

Scope insensitivity. We live in the most peaceful, safest world our species has ever seen.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:08 PM
0

Incorrect. The age 45 and over demographics skews the numbers if only viewed in the totality of human suicides (as a while). Right, so if torture the numbers enough and take out all the ones that might contradict your conclusion... Also, your graph doesn't show a "skyrocketing rate of suicide" even among the demographics you selected. At most you could say they're at a 20 year high. And by the way, if your hypothesis is correct. That the "pussification" of society is leading to higher rates of s…
/r/MensRights25/12/15 10:04 PM
2

This is what you sound like. Horseshoe theory in action I guess.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 09:39 PM
3

So, a percentage of the new generation is misguided about something. How is that news or interesting? It's basically the status quo. Something like 46% of Americans believe god created the Earth a couple thousand years ago.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 09:34 PM
1

Sorry to break it to you but I'm not the only one stating this is the pussification of America. More than 40% of Americans believe in creationism. Argumentum ad populum, buddy. There are entire empirical studies and well regarded sociology people that agree that people need to grow the fuck up especially in the college setting. I'd like to see them. And while this might very well be the case, that doesn't mean that the younger generations are worse off than older ones. It just means they have is…
/r/MensRights25/12/15 09:31 PM
1

Death by non natural causes are declining. Because of better treatments for disease, decline in violence, safer motor vehicle standards and a myriad of other factors that have no direct impact on suicide. [...] it absolutely indicates an increase in the suicide rate statistically. Can you support this with some citations, please?
/r/MensRights25/12/15 09:29 PM
–

It sucks that we don't have fascists around sending people to concentration camps anymore so we can prove how macho we are by sending all of our young men to die fighting them. This modern world is literally the worst.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 09:24 PM
2

Why not compare it to the price of rice in China too? Are we supposed to suddenly lose all perspective here? Suicide rates are not "skyrocketing" by any definition of the word. It's pure alarmism.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 09:22 PM
4

So you reply to my in-depth post with a worthless two sentence soundbyte with no substance or argument. Every old generation complain about how kids these days are taking the world down the road to hell. Funnily enough, by any metric of well-being you can measure the world today is the best the human race has ever lived in. To respond to your post with the same amount of respect you showed mine: shut the fuck up grandpa.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 09:21 PM
6

Look how manly he looks. The good all days!
/r/MensRights25/12/15 09:14 PM
2

That's why suicide rates are skyrocketing. They aren't. The foundation of your argument is based on an erroneous premise. I wonder if you'll reconsider your stance.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 09:10 PM
–

Out of curiosity, are you a millennial yourself?
/r/MensRights25/12/15 08:37 PM
–

Does that mean that women with a Y chromosome are actually men?
/r/MensRights25/12/15 08:36 PM
6

What the fuck?
/r/MensRights25/12/15 08:33 PM
2

Of course. If it is accurate.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 08:32 PM
5

The threshold for what constitutes "harsh realities of the world" is not fixed. For example, in the country I was born in, it consisted of having the one pair of shoes that I only got to wear to go to school or visit the doctor's and wondering if there'd be enough food for dinner. The only way to move that threshold is to complain about it. Isn't that what we're doing here, anyway? People call MRAs whiners all the time for wanting to change the status quo. Maybe we should just accept that child …
/r/MensRights25/12/15 08:28 PM
13

It is simultaneously bad that millennials are giant sissies. So? You seemed to have missed the point of what I wrote above. It is human nature to not be completely satisfied with the status quo. This is not a bad thing, otherwise there would never be progress. As people get used to a higher standard of safety, material security and fairness they will naturally want more of it. MRAs are the last people that should be decrying that shift, since instead of being married at 16 and having to support …
/r/MensRights25/12/15 08:23 PM
–

That seems like progress to me. Do you actually want to go back to the days when a huge percentage of each male generation died holding on to their intestines from artillery fire? It's a good thing that my sons won't have to worry about being conscripted into hellish wars and killed in horrific ways. And it is obvious that as civilisations move away from that kind of violence that the threshold for what is considered unacceptable will change and people will find new concerns. Might as well say A…
/r/MensRights25/12/15 06:49 PM
5

Why not make the women stay too? Why are the men responsible? Are women also cowards for wanting to leave that hellhole?
/r/MensRights25/12/15 06:30 PM
1

Someone's salty.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 06:19 PM
2

Unfortunately for you, the rest of our movement, and this community, is on my side. I say it again: you do not belong here. We have no use for men that can't empathise with the suffering of others.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 05:56 AM
1

Since when are Filipinos a religious community? And I linked you to three sources citing these legal standards. But you are right that I don't give a fuck about religion. The ONLY thing I care about here is the rights and well-being of boys and men. If you think the Men's Rights movement's position on genital mutilation is oppressive to those poor religious genital mutilators, you can fuck right off. We don't want you; you're not welcome here.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 03:25 AM
0

The point that /u/ThePigmanAgain[1] is making is that there are a horde of apologists with genuine influence defending these practices because Islam is an "oppressed" religion. As an intactivist in the US, where Muslims basically have no power most of the backlash in support of circumcision has been from Jews, who are definitely not protected from criticism.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 01:30 AM
2

http://children-laws.laws.com/legal-guardian/piercing-laws http://info.painfulpleasures.com/help-center/information-center/piercing-minors http://www.bodym.com/ But if that same 13 year old wants to get circumcised in accordance with his religious identity as a Muslim, then that should be prohibited? Yes. It should. Because Muslim parents routinely abuse their children through genital mutilation and there need to be special protections in place to ensure that minors, who are wholly dependent on …
/r/MensRights25/12/15 01:29 AM
0

They are allowed to do so in most states with parental consent. They can get a penis tattoo as well. Have you actually looked this up? US Federal law prohibits genital and nipple piercings. And some states prohibit tattooing even with parental consent. Now reformulate your argument.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 01:04 AM
1

I definitely understand that. I think because I can see that it's not black and white that I am so emotionally conflicted about it. It'd be much simpler if one could just dismiss the other side as simply irrevocably evil but that makes for very poor activism. And yes, I don't doubt they love their children. I always stress that fact to people when I discuss genital cutting. Many, specially on the subject of female cutting, seem to think that it's something done purely out of spite or a desire to…
/r/MensRights25/12/15 01:01 AM
0

Minors are not allowed to have genital piercings even with parental consent in the US. Nor here in Aus. As I already said, for laws restricting genital mutilation of any type in places where it is endemic parental consent is irrelevant because the overwhelming majority of the time, it'd be the parents either mutilating their children or forcing/blackmailing/emotionally abusing them into doing it.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 12:50 AM
1

A pass from who? Certainly not from me. I would stop them had I the power and in fact donate significant amounts of both time and money to combat genital mutilation.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 12:45 AM
1

Age of majority is to protect the children from the parents. Their consent is not relevant in this instance.
/r/MensRights25/12/15 12:44 AM
4

Why do men start wars? Because we live in a closed system and evolved to compete with each other for resources. Women, as a whole, have always been the greater beneficiaries of war. The average man? Almost certainly worse off because of it.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 10:46 PM
6

Hardly exclusive to Islam. The practise circumcision in exactly the same way in nearby Catholic Philippines. Note I'm not defending Islam. It is undeniably the source of the majority of genital mutilations in the world, but it is hardly an exclusively Muslim problem—most other groups are just not as big.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 10:43 PM
9

You could apply the same logic to footbinding. It's blatantly true, in the same sense that a woman without crippled, broken feet wouldn't have been able to find a husband a until less than two centuries ago. That's a very cold truth and does not comfort me at all.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 10:19 PM
8

I just can't deal with the cognitive dissonance of being around practising Jewish people. One of my close friends is ethnically Jewish but is against circumcision so it's easy to not think about. Until I'm around his family. It's always at the back of my mind that these people being so nice to me not only support but actively engage in something I can't ethically differentiate from child torture. My mind goes around in circles. They don't seem like evil people, but if we don't define people by t…
/r/MensRights24/12/15 10:16 PM
9

These are parents holding onto their sons as they are literally being tortured. One of the strongest instinctual drives we posses—to protect our genetic legacy—subverted by parasitic cultural and religious memes. It's one of the most disgusting things we humans do, specially because it happens on such a routine basis. And yet some people will tell us, with a straight face, that all cultures and beliefs are equally deserving of respect.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 10:03 PM
1

Whatever age parents stop having direct control over children. So the age of majority.
/r/MensRights24/12/15 10:00 PM
11

What about what the son wants?
/r/MensRights24/12/15 05:39 AM
6

You're absolutely right. Now suck my big fat cock, slave.
/r/MensRights21/12/15 01:00 AM
1

Fuck Judaism and Islam.
/r/MensRights18/12/15 12:32 AM
2

It's important to know how to read papers. Stuff like p-values and methodology matter as much as N and often more so when trying to tease out information.
/r/MensRights16/12/15 05:01 PM
2

That's freaking convenient.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 11:40 PM
2

Reading comprehension mate. I'm telling you that you're way cold here. Maybe stop straw Manning and actually try to understand what I was trying to say? But that might require that you stop sucking this freak's dick. He's definitely acting like a circumfetishist creep but no point did I accuse him of doing any of those things; I listed them to elaborate on why I find it shameful that so many pro circumcision activists are deviant gay men.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 11:38 PM
1

Yeah, we're deeply concerned about the rights of men and boys so it should be obvious why people mock us. No one gives a shit about male suffering. Even supposedly sympathetic ones like you only care about the MRM either as spectacle, because how it can benefit you or as a way to air out your grievances.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 09:18 PM
0

I've been a contributing member of this community for longer than your account has existed.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 08:53 PM
1

Videos of circumcisions are perfectly legal and not considered child pornography. That's part of what makes it vile. Also, I said he was a disgusting creep but also clearly stated he wasn't as bad as these guys. Keep up.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 08:40 PM
1

A so just a cunt.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 08:00 PM
2

Fuck off. You don't belong here.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 07:56 PM
3

Oh you're that Jewish dickhead that used to post here ages ago. I thought you had finally been chased out for being such a douche.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 07:15 PM
6

I think everyone here got that much. Doesn't mean he's not a morally reprehensible cunt for it.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 07:13 PM
6

This is how cults of personality lead to self-delusion and intellectual dishonesty. Tell me something, if you had a fetish for women that have had their clits cut off would you go to a country where female genital mutilation is endemic and write articles about how hot carved up pussies are and how the people trying to fight FGM are weirdos. He's got much to answer for and you should not be defending him.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 07:11 PM
–

These are guys that trade videos of babies being mutilated as wank fodder, write erotic stories about fathers and mothers forcefully mutilating their underage sons and collect medical tools used to tear apart children's genitals or restrain babies so they won't be able to thrash in pain while being mutilated. Freaks is too kind a word. I'm not saying Milo is one of these guys, but he certainly reminds me of them. It's shameful to me as a gay man.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 06:57 PM
–

He sounds like a circumcision fetishist to me. Sexually deviant gay men are unfortunately massively overrepresented among the pro-circumcision side of the debate. In fact, I'd say is almost solely led by gay paedophiles and freaks. As a gay man this makes me sad.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 06:16 PM
2

That was made up on my part for the sake of humour. But it would explain the whole not wanting to lie under Adam.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 06:21 PM
1

It is about consistency within one set.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 06:05 PM
1

:D :D :D Yeah!!! ;) ;) :p
/r/MensRights08/12/15 04:58 PM
3

Most circumcised women loved being cut and will happily hold down their daughters so doctor will cut her.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 04:24 PM
3

She went on to become a queen of Hell. I'm sure there were plenty of dykes among the fallen.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 04:17 PM
2

Jesus Christ you're fucking obnoxious.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 04:02 PM
1

You could try it, but it won't work.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 03:57 PM
5

I don't care what society sees. So the actual laws and procedures don't matter, only your special snowflake interpretation of how things should be? Interesting.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 03:51 PM
1

The biblical story is not exactly a great example. That would make Eve the mother of all of us scientists, skeptics, atheists, transhumanists, scholars etc. All I can say to that is "you go girl". Adam was, comparably, a worthless meatsack. Also let us not forget the story of Lilith, the first lesbian.
/r/MensRights08/12/15 03:36 PM
1

The impact of homosexual contact in countries where HIV is believed to be mostly passed through heterosexual intercourse is unknown. And in countries where it IS known, the numbers are staggering.
/r/MensRights05/12/15 07:13 PM
1

The impact of homosexual contact in countries where HIV is believed to be mostly passed through heterosexual intercourse is unknown. And in countries where it IS known, the numbers are staggering.
/r/MensRights05/12/15 07:13 PM
3

So you believe women in Egypt suffer more than men?
/r/MensRights04/12/15 10:23 PM
3

Why do you believe being a man in Egypt is better than being a woman?
/r/MensRights04/12/15 08:03 PM
1

That's reaching so far you might as well be fisting yourself. Firstly, rape would be a blip in the radar here; not even worth mentioning or considering. Secondly, HIV very much remains a "gay" disease, with men who have sex with men being disproportionately affected. There is absolutely no logical justification or reasoning that can support these numbers. This is a perfect example of our pervasive inability to care about male suffering, even when they're the ones that suffer most---as they do by…
/r/MensRights04/12/15 06:31 PM
5

Why?
/r/MensRights04/12/15 05:52 PM
2

I understand all about allies of convenience. I've made use of Neo-Nazis and White Nationalists in the past, simply because it was opportune and I'm a Hispanic gay guy. That doesn't mean I respect them or like them. Too many people here actually think that Milo is a good guy and will openly express admiration for him.
/r/MensRights03/12/15 03:17 PM
3

There's many posters on r/MR that dismiss circumcision as a valid issue because they're circumcised American men and come with all the baggage that implies. If we start dismissing the issues that we find difficult to accept or relate to then we have no movement. What do I, as a gay man, have to suffer from unfair divorce laws, false rape claims or biased family courts? That's not to say I don't care about issues that affect all men, I do. But if I took the same viewpoint I would never have becom…
/r/MensRights03/12/15 02:40 PM
3

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/05/28/no-one-wants-to-live-in-a-world-of-uncircumcised-penises/ As someone who's focus in activism is ending circumcision, I would rather have a feminist that truly respects bodily autonomy than this guy. I can't see him as anything but a monster.
/r/MensRights03/12/15 02:28 PM
2

Yup. Might makes right [...] yours is a very poor definition of 'human rights', but an accurate description of your presumption of moral superiority. Morality and law, like everything else is relative. There are no gods in the sky that dictate what is and isn't right, no universal truth—so we do the best we can. For someone spouting moral relativism, you're a very poor relativist. It is exactly because there are no easy answers that we must struggle to carve what justice we can out of the world;…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 04:00 PM
2

It is really unbelievable to me that many Muslims move to the west. Is it, really? Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Western countries collectively are still the wealthiest, most powerful civilisation and the Islamic world is kind of a pit. The west is hardly perfect, but what has "Muslim civilisation" given humanity recently? Apart from those horrible things which I need not even list. A couple of centuries ago the Muslim world was flourishing then it stagnated, crawled into a hol…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 02:38 PM
2

Human rights are the those fundamental rights accepted by Western civilisation and our cultural inheritors/vassals. A product of our shared evolutionary history as social primates, European enlightenment values and the progressive march of ethical and philosophical development. As to how and why they apply to infants. It's an accepted social contract; a sequel of our mammalian nature that drives us to have great empathy for our young as opposed to eating them when they get in the way. That plus …
/r/MensRights18/11/15 01:02 PM
2

Nobody gives a shit. Circumcision in steep decline in the anglosphere and that decline has accelerated recently, even as the ranks of intactivists swell. I don't know about you but to me the fact that we're getting what we want kind of seems like evidence that people "give a shit". And it's got nothing to do with 'human rights', whatever the fuck you think that means. With that single statement you get to dismiss an opponent by straw-manning their intentions into a position that you can disregar…
/r/MensRights18/11/15 03:58 AM
2

No. There are quite a few places where circumcision is cultural more than religious. The United States is one of them.
/r/MensRights17/11/15 10:45 AM
7

Not surprising. It's easy to whine about injustice when it's to your benefit and you've got nothing to lose. Straight men complaining about child support, divorce settlements and false rape accusations is easy. Circumcision? That requires introspection and brings all sorts of uncomfortable and painful thoughts and discussions.
/r/MensRights17/11/15 09:50 AM
1

It was not religious.
/r/MensRights17/11/15 09:47 AM
1

Circumcision is a minority practise in Canada and has been for a while. Even in the US it is close to 50%.
/r/MensRights16/11/15 10:39 PM
1

That has nothing to do with gay vs. straight but libertarian vs. egalitarian philosophies. It's no different from say, black people working to have access to places with "no blacks allowed" signs outside. Morality has an opportunity cost. For you, it is easy to take the libertarian approach in this instance as it is not likely to prejudice you much. It's easy to hold strict moral ideals when you don't have to suffer for them—we even see that on here all the time when subjects that make some men …
/r/MensRights02/11/15 10:02 PM
1

It's usually a maze like series of partitions, rooms and alcoves where you can have sex or watch others doing it. They might have glory holes, spots to watch porn, etc.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 09:36 PM
6

Yeah that's not the point of contention. These women are ruining gay bars for gay men. They're pests.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 08:41 AM
4

As long as you don't flip out and start fights or be an asshole you'll definitely be welcomed. Just realise that a not-insignificant percentage of the guys there will want to suck your dick.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 08:40 AM
-6

Not a good strategy. Milo is an unfuckable asshole. Gay men, like straight men, pay more attention when cute and nice people tell them things. There are actually some MRM-sympathetic video makers on YouTybe that happen to be gay.
/r/MensRights01/11/15 08:27 AM
1

I don't think they meant dirty as literally unhygienic, but corrupt.
/r/MensRights30/10/15 06:44 PM
1

I down-voted you for sharing erroneous and harmful information. The last thing I want is for anyone lurking in a human rights based community I participate in seeing something stupid like: Any loss of sensation would be extremely marginal, and it has the benefit of reducing the chance of catching some STD's. And coming off thinking it's OK to mutilate their sons. If you don't want to be donwvoted, don't disseminate harmful stupidity.
/r/MensRights29/10/15 10:37 PM
1

It started getting downvoted because of my comment.
/r/MensRights11/10/15 03:48 PM
–

Really r/Mensrights. This is what you upvote?
/r/MensRights11/10/15 01:27 AM
2

Evidence.
/r/MensRights27/09/15 04:33 PM
0

Of course we'll go after Jews and Muslims eventually; they'll just be a lot easier a target once the rest of the populace doesn't also circumcise. The majority of Germans believe it should be banned. That said, the easiest way to end circumcision among these insane minorities is through assimilation. There are countries in Europe where Jews no longer mutilate. There's no point to the concept of human rights if they are not universal. Jewish and Muslims boys are just as valuable and worthy of pro…
/r/MensRights26/09/15 08:28 AM
1

We've already won on this issue on the long-term. Circumcision will continue to decline in the States like it did in Britian, New Zeland, Australia and Canada.
/r/MensRights26/09/15 06:50 AM
-1

I have access to the same resources you do. If you can do a Google search to dishonestly cherry pick one study out of so many you can look at a few more. Have a nice day.
/r/MensRights26/09/15 12:54 AM
1

Most monsters don't think of themselves as monsters. Oftentimes the horrific things they do are even endorsed by their culture. All monsters are ultimately a "product of their environment". Evil is a myth; very, very few people do evil for its own sake. Everyone is the hero of their own story or at least a just "following orders" or "doing what the parents want". If you can call clinical male circumcision safe, though I've already commented on your silly citation, then clinical female circumcisi…
/r/MensRights25/09/15 05:38 AM
0

There's dozens of studies on the subject, with wildly differing results. The rate of complications has been cited as anything from less than 1% to over 20%. By pasting one link that you seemingly believe to be conclusive you ironically reveal you ignorance. Even the AAP, basically the most pro-circumcision medical organisation in the developed world admitted in its last report that it is unknown.
/r/MensRights25/09/15 05:34 AM
0

The rate of complications for circumcision is unknown. We lhave no clue except vaguely, and only for immediate ones. Most studies don't even count long term repercussions. If you say they are rare you are either ignorant or lying.
/r/MensRights24/09/15 07:34 AM
1

It was an unnecessary procedure. That's the difference. If your daughter dies because you're giving her breast implants, you're solely responsible for her death. However, if she dies because you consented for her to have lifesaving surgery while it is still the result of your actions, it is justified. The difference between the two is obvious. Routine circumcision is a cosmetic procedure; that baby died because their parents, the doctors and his funked up culture says it's acceptable for parents…
/r/MensRights24/09/15 07:30 AM
2

You're right by the way that they probably don't do circumcisions for personal gain. The reasons they do it are even worse. Utter apathy towards male suffering and rights engendered by growing up in a culture where genital mutilation is endemic and being trained in an environment where basically the only thing they learn about the foreskin is how to destroy it.
/r/MensRights24/09/15 07:25 AM
0

Little to no side effects? You mean apart from the human rights violation, which is the crux of our argument against genital mutilation? I said from the perspective of the VICTIM. Their anger is just as valid regardless of the circumstances of their mutilation. I used the example of a rural circumciser for constrast but I could have just as easily mentioned an Egyptian doctor cutting off the clits in a clinical setting, which would be the exact equivalent of the cunt in the OP.
/r/MensRights24/09/15 07:18 AM
-1

She deserves to be vilified regardless of what she did or didn't say. Genital mutilator, remember? What she said just makes for a more interesting story. She has no right to defensive, even if she had reason to. Also, the accusations being thrown at her are not completely ridiculous. You seem to think so but like all of us you are biased too.
/r/MensRights24/09/15 07:12 AM
2

I'm not fishing for anything. I made my meaning quite clear. We see routine male circumcision exactly the same as female circumcision: a grievous human rights abuse. In that light, this protest makes exactly as much sense as a similar one would from anti-fgc activists in the Sudan. It is a group of victims of genital mutilation and allies, surrounded by a culture where genital mutilation is endemic, making a public stand against their mutilator. The fact they're well paid doctors from a "civilis…
/r/MensRights23/09/15 05:17 PM
0

Read OP's comments for the reasons he posted it; they're a lot more nuanced than that. Also, circumcision death stories get posted on here all the time. They are rare but there's at least a couple every year.
/r/MensRights23/09/15 04:23 PM
0

Yes, it could be applied to any of those procedures. But it wasn't. The boy died because a long chain of adults chose to subject him to this violation without a sound reason. I don't think you understand the point I'm trying to make.
/r/MensRights23/09/15 04:09 PM
0

That being said, would I think it was ridiculous if it was for FGM? Yes. Really? Would you voice this thought out loud? Because to 99% of the people around you those women would be seen as outrageous heroes using the only means they've got to fight against a pervasive, institutionalised, misogynistic human rights abuse of the worst order.
/r/MensRights23/09/15 03:58 PM
1

Even the safest procedure has a rate of inescapable complications due to error and other unforeseen events. "When performed correctly" begs the question because it won't always will be, thus you will end up with some dead boys who would have otherwise been alive if they had not been circumcised. Even a single dead boy is too much in the face of the knowledge that routine infant circumcision is 100% unnecessary. That fact shift the moral burden and increase its weight.
/r/MensRights23/09/15 03:51 PM
2

The fact that men are more variable than women is something that is widely believed among MRAs; I believed it myself. However, whereas as before there was only preliminary findings on the subject, we now have more conclusive results. While there are areas where women are more variable than men, there's less of them and overall these categories would not be relevant to the issues we discuss here.
/r/MensRights16/09/15 04:29 AM
3

Is the argument that female circumcision is bad because it diminishes sexual function a bad one? Do you think that circumcised women believe that they don't enjoy intimacy "just fine"? Parents circumcise their sons and daughters because they believe it is a good thing; very few parents want to hurt their children or diminish their quality of life.
/r/MensRights14/09/15 07:55 AM
4

Downvoting is a fact of Reddit; anyone that complains about it and when someone acts like they're being oppressed it comes across as a red-herring at best. Unpopular opinions get downvoted in every community in this site; the fact that you're not banned for claiming that you'll circumcise your sons, which we see as a grievous human rights violation should tell you how much we actually respect open discussion. If you went to /r/feminism and tried to have a discusson on how you support any type of…
/r/MensRights14/09/15 02:20 AM
3

So you've made yourself into a valiant martyr while at the same time using that as an excuse for not considering other's views in an intellectually open manner. This subreddit's called r/MensRights. Why do you think we're so concerned about genital cutting?
/r/MensRights14/09/15 01:42 AM
8

Men have been circumcised for years, and as far as I can tell it's not a problem. A baby cannot decide for himself, so why not let the parents decide? You can't tell me a parent would knowingly do something to their newborn without his best interest at heart. What makes that different from female circumcision? Women that have had the tip of their clits cut off or their vaginal opening sewn shut think it's awesome too. As to a baby not "being able to decide"; they can't decide whether they want t…
/r/MensRights14/09/15 01:40 AM
2

There's plenty of evidence that male circumcision has a negative impact on sexual function. Sorrell's study, Kim's from South Korea etc.
/r/MensRights14/09/15 01:36 AM
-1

The reply that he gave the original poster deserved nothing less. It has nothing to do with opinions but his being a patronising twat to someone doing nothing but expressing themselves.
/r/MensRights13/09/15 12:39 AM
-5

I am neither upset nor agitated.
/r/MensRights12/09/15 09:34 PM
–

You make it sound like some kind of mind virus that rearranges your priorities in a way that your life gets objectively worse (people with kids don't have better quality of life as far as I'm aware) and makes you be happy about the fact. If you want people to consider your point of view, maybe try thinking about theirs instead of being a patronising cuntflap?
/r/MensRights12/09/15 09:28 PM
–

They identify as intactivists.
/r/MensRights09/09/15 07:10 AM
4

There's more of one than the other. Makes sense when you remember that men are more likely to have all sorts of genetic and developmental issues than women.
/r/MensRights01/09/15 08:03 PM
1

How exactly do you rank an issue's importance?
/r/MensRights31/08/15 07:13 PM
1

As far as homosexual thinkers go, I'd skip Donovan and give Focault a shot instead; not a great philosopher but at least you'll gain some insight on the philosophy of history that will serve you later. On a more serious note, in spite of the fact that he has a few interesting things to say, the guy just rubs me the wrong way. I'm not usually one to attack a person as opposed to their arguments but the fact that he's gay just makes it more personal. The guy's a white nationalist sympathiser, a wr…
/r/MensRights31/08/15 07:11 PM
4

Female on male rape included unwanted penetration...
/r/MensRights24/08/15 05:01 AM
2

No.
/r/MensRights19/08/15 07:44 AM
2

You're insane.
/r/MensRights13/08/15 03:30 AM
1

Your parents didn't suck at discipline; your brain wasn't developing properly. Them beating you, as such behavioural issues would have been corrected in the past, would not have changed that. Remember that bit where I said ADHD has been recently shown to have genetic, extremely hereditary components? That's not social science buddy, and neither was the other paper I cited on the way it affects brain development and growth. By your own admission this condition in runs strongly in your family; iro…
/r/MensRights03/08/15 07:17 PM
1

You're moving the goalposts. The majority of Muslims don't do it in infancy. You were wrong. Also, what the hell are you doing on this sub. Go away.
/r/MensRights03/08/15 08:10 AM
0

penisular arabs What percentage of the global Muslim population do they make up? You're wrong. You're simply and inarguable wrong. The overwhelming majority of Muslim circumcision does not happen a week after birth. Indonesia. Largest Muslim countries; done during adolescence. Morocco. Between the ages of seven and ten. Malaysia. Before the age of 10. Prefered age is usually 7. The preferred age is usually seven[...]
/r/MensRights03/08/15 12:11 AM
1

You are obviously and evidently wrong. A simple google search on the subject on a country by country basis will show wildly varying ages but most of them would be well after the first few days of life. Website stating the majority of Muslim circumcisions occurs between the ges of 5 and puberty Turkey. Right before they start school
/r/MensRights02/08/15 08:52 PM
1

I see you didn't address the rest of my post. And all I did was post another if Milo's articles as a reply to your hero worshipping comment.
/r/MensRights02/08/15 11:46 AM
1

I do have evidence for the short-term effects of the intervention we've actually been talking about, though—viz., ADHD medication. Insomnia; headaches; feelings of losing my mind; feeling, by the third prescription they decided to try against me, that I was doomed to social alienation and dysfunction. Frankly, if I'm an outlier in this it is because I had it easy, had the best doctors examining me, uncommonly attentive parents with uncommon means and motivation to mitigate my struggles with the …
/r/MensRights02/08/15 02:51 AM
1

Unchecked maleness has ALWAYS been deemed dangerous. In the past it was controlled through physical, emotional and psychological abuse and conditioning and then if you go back far enough institutionalised androcide such as culling wars, dangerous rites of passage and hundreds of other little filters. The modern status quo is a freaking improvement. Also, ironically, through genital mutilation of all sorts from subincision, circumcision, urethral perforation etc. BTW. I notice you didn't address …
/r/MensRights01/08/15 03:29 PM
1

I didn't mean it's not one of the most important issues, just that it's not strongly associated with the MRM because most people who strongly oppose it, are not MRAs. Then your entire point is irrelevant. The MRM is a tiny, fringe club in comparison to the intactivist movement and even that is not exactly mainstream. It evidences that circumcision is not an issue strongly associated with the MRM in most people's minds. So what? I still struggle to see how this is relevant?
/r/MensRights01/08/15 10:54 AM
1

You're creating a false dichotomy where there isn't one. Even if it were true that one is worse than the other doesn't absolve him of the ethical burden of actively advocating for the other. Which admittedly you recognise, as you said you agree he's wrong. It also, however, doesn't outweigh it to the point that you believe it does. A piece such as that SHOULD provoke a large diminishment of respect for him. Also, cut it with the damn hyperbole. Obviously you believe in what you're saying and it …
/r/MensRights01/08/15 10:52 AM
1

That's interesting in the context of the original comment I replied to, which was basically this guy praising Milo, which is become quite common. In fact, I said as much: I mentioned how he's made some very interesting commentary but that does not make him a good person and definitely not deserving of such praise.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 11:50 AM
2

On top of which circumcision is the men's rights issue most weakly associated with the MRM What do you base that on? Off the top of my head I can think of at least two influential MR leaders that think of this as the most important MR issues; JohnTheOther being one and JudgyBitch the other, possibly Dean Esmay as well. What you CAN say is that it is one of the most internally controversial issues in the movement but that's not really the same thing. It's easy to be in favor of things when all th…
/r/MensRights30/07/15 10:36 AM
2

Why not?
/r/MensRights30/07/15 09:38 AM
1

That's more vital and impactful a point of men's rights advocacy, it seems to me, than is fighting MGM or finding in-tact cocks appealing. He ends his article with the statement: "Cut your kids." He's literally telling people to abuse their sons. Universally. He believes all boys should be subjected to horrific physical abuse as a matter of course. I posit here that you really need need to re-calibrate your moral compass. Or maybe actually read the entire article?
/r/MensRights30/07/15 09:36 AM
2

[...] and specifically thinking about them in compassionate, empathetic terms, even those with whom he doesn't identify strongly Yeah, I definitely see the compassion towards males just oozing off this article. He's made some cogent, intelligent and biting arguments but that doesn't make him a good person. I'm certainly not convinced he's either compassionate or empathetic.
/r/MensRights30/07/15 09:13 AM
1

The most telling bit of your post is the fact that you omit the loss of the foreskin as one of the consequences of circumcision. That said, lets get rid of one of your points altogether. There's is no difference in terms of the conditions that female and male circumcision are performed in. In fact, more male circumcision would be performed under the worst conditions around the world than the TOTAL amount of female circumcisions. Also, plenty of female circumcisions are performed by medical perso…
/r/MensRights23/07/15 05:10 PM
1

Now this being said can someone please explain the similarity. That would make for a very, very long post. How about you tell us how you think they're different? Would make it much easier to address.
/r/MensRights23/07/15 09:55 AM
1

While I am not in favor of circumcision inflicted on children, I consider it relatively low on the list of injustices men currently face. How do you arrive at that conclusion? I can't see which angle you can approach the issue that would rank it as "low" on any concern list. Not the human rights angle, certainly not suffering.
/r/MensRights14/07/15 06:04 AM
1

His sons grew up and never spoke to him again as far as I know. He died alone, of liver failure from drinking. You reap what you sow.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 09:20 PM
1

As I said, it actually happens. Less with race, since its a settled issue, thus more taboo. It is a spectrum. For example, it is a bit more likely to happen with say, sexual minorities. You can find many instances of principals from bumfuck southern states and hick towns saying horrible things about gay kids. Joking about hurting men and male suffering in general is completely acceptable in almost every facet and setting.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 05:29 AM
1

"If all these nigger kids didnt go to my school..we would've get more funding". That's the joke. Doesn't even need the word nigger in it.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 05:21 AM
1

In the fabricated example, there's nothing humorous about it, so it calls into question the principal's motivation for saying it. Humour is subjective. I've heard plenty of jokes at the expense of black people that both recipient and teller certainly thought were funny. The fact that I even have to write this boggles the mind. [...] because, again, no school principal would actually say that. Because it's taboo to joke about race but jokes about male genital mutilation are rampant in cultures wh…
/r/MensRights13/07/15 05:12 AM
2

Well at least you're consistently monstrous. That said, we do have laws that arbitrarily ban child abuse; now I'm wondering where exactly that threshold is for you. Remove the labia minora or clitoral hood? Those are not equivalent in form or function to the foreskin. Just because the clitoral hood is roughly homologous to foreskin doesn't mean it has the same value. The foreskin is more functional than all of the external female genitalia with the arguable exception of the external clitoris. Yo…
/r/MensRights13/07/15 05:07 AM
1

Based on that fact that you are scrambling to disassociate the comment above about niggers with what this woman said about genital mutilation.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 04:24 AM
1

Not your business as it is their private family issue. That's one of the oldest excuses for child abuse in the book. I remember growing up in Cuba, people using the same reasoning ignore a father in the community that would beat his sons with a length of rubber hose.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 04:07 AM
1

Not your son , so not your problem. Yet we have laws banning child abuse. So I guess sometimes it is?
/r/MensRights13/07/15 04:06 AM
3

This is the comment you want, OP.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 04:04 AM
2

Not your kid. Would you be saying the same thing if they wanted to circumcise their daughter? Or, you know, arbitrarily subject their child to some other comparable form of physical harm.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 04:04 AM
1

It's a perfectly apt comparison. In fact, it's disproportionately apt; because the scenario that the general population would deem more offensive (and would definitely get her fired—probably with your endorsement) is in fact, a lot less objectionable than what this woman actually said.
/r/MensRights13/07/15 04:01 AM
2

Evey time a woman does something horrible, such as drowning her kids, burning her husband or saying that all men should be killed, they get sympathy in the form of calling her insane. When men do horrible things? They get the lethal injection of have their lives ruined forever because they are evil. A massive percent of incarcerated men in the US have some kind of mental illness yet somehow that is very rarely mentioned. Men just do bad things cause it is in our nature. Only time the mental illn…
/r/MensRights13/07/15 03:48 AM
1

No, it's not. You just think it's more acceptable for someone to joke about the real, physical mutilation of half of the population but balk at the idea of someone saying mean words, also jokingly, about a minority. Can you even priority?
/r/MensRights13/07/15 03:41 AM
-1

I see. You have a nice day.
/r/MensRights06/07/15 02:01 AM
-1

I consider telling people to kill themselves to be crossing a line. Any community that does so on a regular basis is usually scum---SJWs are a good example.
/r/MensRights06/07/15 01:49 AM
–

Go and take an acid bath. I understand how you feel but this is unnecessary.
/r/MensRights05/07/15 02:40 PM
4

Too bad I'm in Melbourne. I would totally attend one of these.
/r/MensRights04/07/15 02:19 PM
3

I live in a society where my time is worth more doing productive things vs. acquiring outdated or specialised skills. It's good as a hobby but don't mistake that for relevance. Changing a tire is a good example. I live in a city in a wealthy country; it's actually cheaper for me to have someone change a tire for me than risk ruining my expensive suit or wreck my image by damaging my nails, staining my hands etc. There's all sorta of opportunity costs offsets involved here that have nothing to do…
/r/MensRights04/07/15 12:24 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter