TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Eumemicist Archive

View 0 posts and 22 comments by Eumemicist 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)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

My partner also thinks uncut is gross. But I think how you feel about foreskin is determined by familiarity and culture. My only point is that guys who have been circumcised later in life have given us mixed reviews about sexual pleasure pre and post circumcision. But there's this industry that wants to make cut guys depressed so that they buy all the accessories and foreskin restoration stuff. So in my opinion, opposition to circumcision is good, because babies cannot consent. But the culture o…
/r/MensRights14/02/18 03:55 PM
1

You’ve also argued for the flat earth theory. You’re not in your right mind man.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 03:16 PM
1

But the studies are all over the map. A lot of guys who were circumcised give you something like: I was circumcised as an adult. 1. Masturbating with a foreskin is more sensuous than masturbating with an unlubricated circumcised penis. 2. Masturbating with a lubricated circumcised penis is more sensuous than masturbating with an uncircumcised penis (with or without a lubricant). 3. Vaginal sex is more sensuous because the foreskin does not get in the way. 4. Note that I am using the word 'sensuo…
/r/MensRights14/02/18 12:56 PM
2

I just looked at your posts. You have an obsession man. Whats your story? Did someone circumcise you with a wood chipper or something? This is the guy who literally just had the epiphany all of the sudden that circumcision causes prostate cancer. Do you think that's how science is done? Here's a quote from the genius to support his claim: incidence of prostate cancer was much higher in american males with 172,258 cases in the us (https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/prostate/statistics/index.htm) vs 46.69…
/r/MensRights14/02/18 04:59 AM
2

How could you possibly know this?
/r/MensRights14/02/18 03:13 AM
1

Thus, non-differential misclassification of sexual outcomes in these African trials probably favoured the null hypothesis of no difference But still, if there were a problem you know these blokes would have answered, NO, BAD, VERY BAD. We're a bit out of our depth here arguing studies back and forth. But even if the study I cited is flawed, it's evidence of a lack of clear dissatisfaction with circumcision. And with something SO important as the penis that is very telling evidence. If I lost an …
/r/MensRights14/02/18 01:32 AM
0

My penis is excellent. I've seen some great cut ones and some great uncut ones and some real uglies from both camps as well.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 01:09 AM
1

This kind of underscores my point too: the consent issue is enough to call for an end to circumcision. We don't have to act like there's some huge difference in sensitivity between cut and uncut guys. Because that would imply that if the finding were reversed, it would be ethical to circumcise boys without consent. (BTW If I'm responding slow it's because I'm on an 8-minute delay thing--if someone could turn this off I could have a real time convo).
/r/MensRights14/02/18 12:59 AM
3

I figured I would be but who cares. I just want to have a solid discussion about it because there are some myths out there. I would welcome any uncut guy to ask me about how I experience sex.
/r/MensRights14/02/18 12:49 AM
0

It is, as a matter of fact. Did you read what my stance is on circumcision?
/r/MensRights14/02/18 12:39 AM
1

I’m just saying if you’re gauging a person’s satisfaction with their sex life, it isn’t going to help accuracy if the population polled thinks they’re doing their duty to god by being circumcised. So a good poll would be limited to secular people or people who have no religious tradition of circumcision. I totally agree with neuroplasticity as a buzzword and have denounced it as such in conversations about the brain as “blank slate.” But it is implausible that reward delivery would vary greatly …
/r/MensRights14/02/18 12:21 AM
-2

A great number of circumcised women feel the same way. But for religious and cultural reasons. I need a secular reason. So in a sense, all circumcisions that remove sensory tissue are in fact "circumcising the brain" to an extent. This is controversial among doctors. I doubt we're going to resolve the issue here. But I have to think that in a person circumcised at birth, neuroplasticity adjusts to correct for lost nerve endings. The brain isn't going to deliver less of a reward just because some…
/r/MensRights13/02/18 11:38 PM
-7

I'm not a defender of circumcision. But I was circumcised and I feel a bit put down by the intactivist rhetoric. I don't like the undertone that there's something wrong with my penis or that sex or masturbation isn't as good for me as it is for other guys. I'm gay and I've played with cut and uncut dicks. From the enthusiasm and involuntary twitches and reactions, it would seem that presence of foreskin isn't what determine's the guy's sensitivity or level of enjoyment. There have been guys who …
/r/MensRights13/02/18 10:54 PM
1

I agree. So no bubble bursted.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 06:27 PM
0

Still is a crime. Though much easier to prosecute if he was penetrated or someone put their mouth on his dick. With male victims I think you'd disproportionately see same-sex situations. I think a guy would also be much less likely to call the police too.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 04:53 PM
1

However, there still an obvious threshold of conscious awareness beyond which someone can't consent to sex. If someone doesn't have a firm grip on reality or is going in and out of sleep, initiating sex with her is arguably a sexual crime. A noble person will make sure the basic faculties are online before sex. And it is wise to err on the side of no sex with someone new who is drunk.
/r/MensRights20/07/17 12:44 PM
1

You might be right. But I wonder how many men would show up. Men and women are not precisely similarly situated with respect to domestic violence. It's not just a coincidence or product of sexism that women's shelters have emerged and not men's shelters. Violence against women used to be omnipresent if not socially-sanctioned fairly recently in human history and is still acceptable in some parts of the world. Women don't have a high level of testosterone. Nor do they have the same evolutionary i…
/r/MensRights22/12/16 05:31 PM
-6

Is there really a demand for shelters that take men?
/r/MensRights22/12/16 04:16 PM
1

What about gay white men?
/r/MensRights14/06/16 01:25 PM
3

The only sense in which she could be "entitled" is in the moral sense, not the legal sense. So just be careful not to confuse the two.
/r/TheRedPill13/03/16 03:20 PM
5

Law student here. She isn't right. There is no legally recognized "common law marriage" as it's described here. If both parties falsely believe they are actually married because they have been living together sometimes elements of the marriage are enforceable under an estoppel theory, but those cases are rare and nothing like the one here.
/r/TheRedPill13/03/16 02:51 PM
4

There's nothing remotely alpha about cutting off your opponent's valid arguments and calling him glib. If you want to dominate in an argument, calmly reinforce your claims with reason and evidence. Don't look impatient and frustrated like this brainwashed clown.
/r/TheRedPill06/01/15 06:24 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter