TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Other-Medium5577 Archive

View 1 post and 482 comments by Other-Medium5577 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)
118

GeneralOther-Medium5577/r/MensRights22/10/23 02:02 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

It's not that simple. If you want a pure meritocracy, eliminate male/female dichotomies in all sports. Women would be done.
/r/MensRights18/05/24 09:59 PM
1

For all the bluster about "free the nipple", few women want that to happen routinely in public. There are several US cities where feminists changed local ordinances, allowing breasts to be openly exposed, but very few women avail themselves of that opportunity. The truth is that only a small percentage of women are proud of their boobs, proud enough to flaunt them, and female modesty is often more about body habitus concerns than shame about sexual display.
/r/MensRights16/05/24 02:56 PM
22

All relationships have a transactional component to them, given that humans are concupiscent by nature. Some people are more transactional than others, as this story clearly shows. Many women have the idea that a man will provide for her, and many men have the idea that women will give them in return love, affection, and sex. Feminists bristled at this transactional arrangement, and claimed that marriage and family amount to some kind of slavery. But slavery cuts both ways, the arrangement worke…
/r/MensRights16/05/24 12:47 PM
9

RIP young man. What a pity, what a shame.
/r/MensRights16/05/24 03:16 AM
2

3 months of "washout" before a man is rendered infertile. I predict that there will be valve malfunctions and occasional infections and not infrequent operator errors.
/r/MensRights14/05/24 08:56 PM
1

Are you serious? They tax property, what makes you think they won't tax your income no matter what it goes to? I sympathize with your plight, totally, but I never heard of any politician agreeing to give up tax revenues.
/r/MensRights14/05/24 03:25 PM
3

Yeah because letting maniacal dictators rule the world is a good plan for human flourishing. Wars are the reason that you can waste your time on this site, while men who lost their lives to your benefit lie in their graves.
/r/MensRights14/05/24 10:21 AM
70

Ridiculous. If a man did this to his wife, and he was given probation, it would be all over the news media causing outrage. The gals at the View would lose what little minds they have left.
/r/MensRights13/05/24 06:53 PM
6

Fair enough. It seems obvious to me that testosterone promotes aggressive behavior, generally speaking.... Male lions are more aggressive than female lions....most of the mammalian animal Class would demonstrate that general fact... but a female grizzly with cubs can be a force to be reckoned with....
/r/MensRights13/05/24 02:51 PM
36

Men are over represented at the extreme end of violence on a Bell curve according to Jordan Peterson. That's why violent offenders in prison are mostly male.
/r/MensRights13/05/24 08:55 AM
5

Totally agree. I see no point to making my bed. I do see a point in not having clothes on the floor, dirty dishes on the counter or in the sink. But a pair of shoes at the side of my bed where I can reach them easily is logical, putting them in a closet overnight makes no sense.
/r/MensRights12/05/24 02:20 PM
10

Agreed. It seems that they have won their goal.
/r/MensRights10/05/24 02:32 AM
38

What are feminists fighting for? Answer that first.
/r/MensRights09/05/24 11:47 PM
1

I'm talking about western feminism, yes I have talked to many of those jezebels, and they can go fuck themselves. And your deep concern for third world oppression of women is duly noted, and you earned your virtuous sanctimony points, now go away.
/r/MensRights09/05/24 10:54 PM
8

Western feminists don't give a fuck about women being oppressed in third world countries. They don't want fairness, they want special privileges. They have all the rights that men have and none of the negatives that come with being a man. For most of history men never had any right to vote for anything.
/r/MensRights09/05/24 10:30 PM
-2

Maybe so. You could be right. I'm just not sad about being circumcised.
/r/MensRights01/05/24 01:32 PM
2

Toxic femininity.
/r/MensRights01/05/24 12:42 PM
-1

I'm not sure about that. Sensitivity studies don't demonstrate that, and adults circumcised as adults are generally not negatively affected.
/r/MensRights01/05/24 12:32 PM
-5

And then there are people who freak the fuck out that others are happily circumcised.
/r/MensRights01/05/24 12:13 PM
-10

I understand the "bodily autonomy" argument, but it isn't like there are NO adults who need to have circumcisions for medical reasons, and many such men are happily circumcised as adults and don't miss having a foreskin. Studies show general acceptance of the results. This subject creates so much emotional rancor that it becomes irrational in a hurry. My bias is that it really doesn't matter that much. Adults choose everything that happens to their kids. I know leftists who don't like parents ch…
/r/MensRights01/05/24 11:46 AM
-10

Foreskin fetishists here lose their shit over people who are happily circumcised. They need their own sub.
/r/MensRights01/05/24 10:33 AM
8

Or singur.
/r/MensRights30/04/24 12:19 PM
1

This site doesn't need your concern trolling.
/r/MensRights26/04/24 02:17 AM
1

Look, you came on here saying that men's rights members are shitbags for the kinds of posts that point out sentencing disparities, now you're claiming some other shit. Just cut the crap and admit that men have grievances they deserve to air out on this platform. Holy fuck.
/r/MensRights26/04/24 02:04 AM
1

Women average lower sentences for similar crimes that men commit in America. And that sucks. https://www.mcgrathtraining.com/post/offenders-and-sentencing-by-gender-are-females-treated-differently
/r/MensRights26/04/24 01:56 AM
1

Men get bigger sentences than women do for the same or similar crimes. That's bullshit. It's true in America. Whether that's true in Saudi Arabia, we don't know and can't know. Sorry.
/r/MensRights26/04/24 01:00 AM
2

You made a point and were proved wrong. Take the L and admit that your post is crap.
/r/MensRights26/04/24 12:53 AM
3

No, the fetus is biologically speaking most akin to a parasite. It is quite distinct from the mother, so much so that the mother's immune system can sometimes recognize it as different (Rh factor incompatibility) and attack the fetus. The fetus will be expelled. It is hard for non biologists to grasp, but the uterus is like the alimentary canal, it opens to the outside world and what goes into it or through it is really not a part of the physiology of the owner of the alimentary canal or uterus.
/r/MensRights24/04/24 03:46 PM
3

False. The fetus is only 50% or her genetics, the placenta is derived from fetal tissues and maternal tissues, and is quite immunologically and genetically distinct. The placenta is a barrier to many things between the mother's blood stream and the fetal blood stream. It will be expelled from the mother. You share 50% of your DNA with your mom, can she kill you? Why not? Are you not her body?
/r/MensRights24/04/24 03:36 PM
3

But the fetus is biologically and immunologically and genetically and ontologically NOT the body or body part of the pregnant woman.
/r/MensRights24/04/24 03:07 PM
1

That's irrelevant. A claim that PMS "made her" do a thing was grounds for forgiving her actions. Whether she committed the act was not the question at the time that she was forgiven for doing it. It's a non falsifiable claim, how would a judge know whether she had PMS or not?
/r/MensRights22/04/24 06:46 AM
1

You're a solipsist. Just stop. We are not robots or automatons, there are good and holy women in this world, Find one, engage her as a distinct and separate human being, you just might find that your assumptions are based on social media. There are a lot of bad people in this world, but also some really great ones.
/r/MensRights21/04/24 11:51 PM
1

You're devolving into solipsism. Get out of your head and hang out with some nice, loving, holy women. They exist, you have to look for them.
/r/MensRights21/04/24 11:40 PM
4

And how do we know that a woman had PMS or was pre-menstrual?? What evidence will prove that? Do we just take her word for it?
/r/MensRights21/04/24 09:31 PM
6

No ideas are ever dead, they always come back in new forms. Example: there are modern people who claim to be witches. I thought that the idea of witches died after the salem witch trials; that fiasco has been used (unfairly) to argue against normal, mainstream Christianity since I was young, and yet here we are and witchcraft has made a comeback. Expect the PMS argument to make a comeback.
/r/MensRights21/04/24 04:45 PM
45

It's a diagnosis that can't be proved or disproved. Now what are we gonna do, let any female kill her husband for the life insurance and claim that she had PMS? Every crime, every malfeasance committed by a woman will be forgiven? This is insanity.
/r/MensRights21/04/24 03:54 PM
13

At my work all the female employees put on the View on the TV in the break room. I would change the channel and they would put it right back on when I left. (I was the owner of the damn thing so that's why I could change the channel).
/r/MensRights19/04/24 08:58 PM
34

The silence from "non-man-hating" feminists when this kind of crap is so prevalent is deafening. I never hear any defense of men from any females in public discourse.
/r/MensRights19/04/24 06:33 PM
132

Feminists are the stupidest people on earth.
/r/MensRights19/04/24 01:42 PM
4

The question is stupid because it should specify: a man whom you are friends with, vs a random stranger who happens to rush at you from out of the underbrush as a bear would do? It's an inflammatory bunch of crap.
/r/MensRights17/04/24 08:08 PM
2

That's an interesting claim, one that I think needs more analysis than what you gave. The dirty secret is that work, especially "labor", has been made less valuable as the purchasing power of the dollar has been progressively eroded by the uni-party (but especially the Democrats), through their crazy spending on social programs and overseas money transfers etc. Our government spends like drunken sailors. We have at least 3% annualized compounded inflation. Nobody gets a COLA of 3% every year. Pr…
/r/MensRights17/04/24 10:44 AM
14

The interlocutors discussing the story are very much real feminists. That's the point
/r/MensRights13/04/24 05:18 PM
2

You're a real peach. It seems to me that women are controlled by their clit and hormones. That nubbin needs rubbin.
/r/MensRights11/04/24 06:43 PM
4

You should have been asked if you wanted her there or not. It's crap. Women don't get treated that way. Grrr.....chaperones should be based on the stated preferences of the patient.
/r/MensRights11/04/24 05:51 PM
2

Was she a chaperone?
/r/MensRights11/04/24 05:47 PM
8

Yep. I saw a technician peek under the sheets of an unconscious male patient; a nurse show a photo to other nurses of a well-endowed male; nurses laughing and making fun of genital size; nurses laughing about a male with priapism; female doctor embarrassing a male patient for his condom catheter not staying in place due to his small penis; routinely male patients being asked to "drop their drawers" in front of female chaperones and students without the usual gowning accorded to female patients; …
/r/MensRights11/04/24 02:49 PM
8

....as you lie there on the table wide awake with multiple females in the room staring at you. Look up "Male Patient Modesty" online. Stories abound.
/r/MensRights11/04/24 09:38 AM
28

This shit pisses me off about as much as anything does. Healthcare is a privacy-free zone for men too.
/r/MensRights10/04/24 09:56 PM
134

lol. Men, get back to work! Women, here is your feather bed.
/r/MensRights10/04/24 01:39 PM
25

Good point. You can't even measure the eyeballs on the men's game because of that. Every bar and grill in the county had the men's game on.
/r/MensRights10/04/24 01:26 PM
10

If the sexes were reversed, articles would call it rape, and so would you. The word "statutory" is hardly ever used in a context where the age differences are that great between a male perp and female victim.
/r/MensRights10/04/24 12:47 AM
19

You're preaching to the choir. Men here don't do random acts of violence, and men here generally blame feminism and its liberal nonsense of soft-on -crime policies.
/r/MensRights09/04/24 10:21 PM
8

And you didn't answer the question.
/r/MensRights09/04/24 09:57 PM
24

Do men garner coverage when they commit "statutory" rape? Why is the word "statutory" only appended to cases that involve female perps do you suppose? Would you use that term if the genders were reversed? The question answers itself.
/r/MensRights09/04/24 07:35 PM
102

It's garbage. Even an MD can't tell by visual inspection alone whether someone harbors an STD. It's nonsense. From the CDC: "You also can get genital herpes from a sex partner who does not have a visible sore or is unaware of their infection. It is also possible to get genital herpes if you receive oral sex from a partner with oral herpes." The FDA should shut that thing down, it's totally not scientific and has zero benefit.
/r/MensRights07/04/24 04:50 PM
3

Best for what?
/r/MensRights06/04/24 04:26 PM
1

So you ignored everything that I said, bringing up straw man questions. Here's you: "humans are just things that people believe are humans." Ok, I don't believe that you are human. Case closed. Are atoms what they are independent of opinions, or are they like schrodinger phenomena, they only exist as atoms if you BELIEVE that they do. Holy shit, I'm done.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 06:45 PM
1

When you pretend that definitions confer ontological essence on things, then you're pretending to be ignorant. An atom is an atom whether you want to call it that or not. A fetus is ontologically a human being whether you care to admit that or not too. It is human, it is an offspring, it is genetically and immunologcially distinct from the mother, so much so that the mother's immune system can attack the fetus in the case of Rh blood incompatibility. It will be expelled from her body in due time…
/r/MensRights02/04/24 06:33 PM
1

Definitions follow from functions and form and biology and important distinctions, not the other way around. I wish that you showed signs of actually having had an education. You pretend to be ignorant to win arguments.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 06:20 PM
1

I'm pretty sure that it is YOU who does not have the requisite scientific understanding to practice medicine. If you can't distinguish a bacterial cell from a human cell, or a somatic cell from a germ cell line, or a fertilized ovum from a non fertilized ovum, and make important distinctions about their ontological essences, then you aren't fit to be a doctor. "Gee Mrs, Jones, I removed your kidney instead of your appendix, but after all, who cares, definitions are just so ARBITRARY!"
/r/MensRights02/04/24 06:15 PM
1

Law has nothing to do with biology. Living tissue belongs to a species. A fetus is a Homo sapiens living tissue genetically and biologically. Homo sapiens means human. It is not the mother's living tissue. It is separate and distinct biologically. Biological realities don't care about YOUR perceptions or definitions, they really don't. If your brain has syphilis bacteria inside it, which would well be true, then your brain turning to oatmeal is independent of whether YOU care to call it syphilis…
/r/MensRights02/04/24 06:02 PM
2

Tell me your definition. Because the product of conception is not animal or plant life. It is alive, and it is human tissue, therefore, human life. It is genetically and immunologically and biologically separate and distinct from the mother, it actually exists in a parasitic relationship to the mother and is not her body. You don't get to deny biological reality with word games.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 05:46 PM
1

When does it become human lol? Do tell. It's not animal, it's not vegetable. It's literally alive and human.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 05:38 PM
1

Biology doesn't care about your use of the term fetus. It is alive, it is human. Period.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 05:27 PM
1

The State prohibits murder. It's that simple. A fetus is a human life, it's that simple. The government imposes its morality on others all the time. Telling us that we must have our incomes forcibly taken from us to support public schools or healthcare or foreign countries is an imposition of simeone's morality ("everyone deserves a free education"!) on us. Telling us that we can't speed in our car, we can't litter, we can't rape or murder or commit arson or fly a drone over our neighbor's house…
/r/MensRights02/04/24 05:07 PM
2

You're the one imposing your values on me. I don't want what you consider to be things that YOU claim lead to the health and safety of society. Public schools do no such thing. It's not more appealing to ME! See how that works? The right to life and liberty trump your fascist desire to control my money. And life is a fundamental right, your argument wound mean that I could commmit infanticide, why not?
/r/MensRights02/04/24 04:30 PM
1

All laws are an imposition of one person's morality on another person. Who are you to tell me that I have to pay taxes? To support the public schools with property taxes? To not murder or burn down a building? Keep your laws off my freedom. Enjoy your fascist barbarity.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 04:05 PM
2

Allowing abortion up until term birth is monstrously evil. Have a nice barbarian life.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 04:01 PM
0

It's not a clump of cells past the earliest stages lol. At 25 weeks it is very much a tiny baby. And even if it were, we are all "just clumps of cells" when you get down to it. The question is, what does that clump of cells represent? A woman does not confer humanity or lack thereof on a thing based on her opinion. Using that argument, she could kill her newborn. That makes no sense. All killers dehumanize their victims. So where in the continuum of development does the thing assume humanity of …
/r/MensRights02/04/24 03:18 PM
2

That makes zero sense. The ontological essence of a product of human conception is "human being". Since embryological development is a process, what stage of the process in your very educated and superior opinion confers enough humanity on the thing to make it deserving of protection under the law? Do tell. And explain what exactly happens at time zero plus one second versus time zero minus one second that confers this right to life? Or do you even believe that humans deserve protection at all?
/r/MensRights02/04/24 02:14 PM
1

I took college and medical school embryology. The ontological essence of the zygote/morula/blastocyst/embryo/fetus is a human being. And if you really know embryology and Medicine, then you're quite aware that NICUs often have 25 week old premature newborns in them and they are routinely saved. They have arms and legs and heads and heartbeats and look like tiny babies. What exactly is your point?
/r/MensRights02/04/24 01:55 PM
3

Abortion kills an innocent being that is human. Murder.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 01:13 PM
3

I heard you the first 10 times. You support murder, I understand that.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 01:08 PM
2

Choice is not a magic word that papers over immoral behavior. Murder is a choice. What does that prove?
/r/MensRights02/04/24 12:20 PM
3

Weird that you wanna kill babies. Sick even. Why don't you support infanticide? After all, many poor women drop a kid and can't take care of it, they should just strangle the little fucker and be done with it.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 12:09 PM
1

How does the presence of the thing (fetus, baby, words do not determine ontological essence) inside the uterus determine its moral significance and attributes? Geographic space makes it either worthy of protection or not? Weird.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 11:44 AM
3

So any reason, because mental health can mean "I'm so depressed". What is the difference between killing it at 9 months before birth or after? Why not strangle the thing after it's born? Much cheaper and safer.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 11:31 AM
2

Those states allow it for any reason. Any reason. Many other states allow it for mental health. A full-term fetus is a baby. Have you ever seen a kid at nine months gestation? 8 months? 7 months? Hell, 26 weeks? It's very much a baby. Fetus is just a word that means offspring, you don't get to change its identity with a word. Look at pictures, kids don't just suddenly form and pop out of mom at the last second after enterimg the vagina as a just a blob of cells. Good grief study just a little bi…
/r/MensRights02/04/24 11:15 AM
4

So at first you acted like "no, that doesn't even happen", now you admit that you support it. You guys are pathetic. At least start the argument from the truthful position, that you support the killing fully formed babies. Nasty.
/r/MensRights02/04/24 11:05 AM
2

Eight states and Washington, D.C., allow abortion until birth for any reason (Alaska, Colorado, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, and New York). Illinois allows abortion until term birth for health reasons, mental health being one such reason, so basically anybody can get an abortion until term birth. Several other states are the same way. Health exception can mean mental health. A miscarriage is a natural death so has nothing to do with elective abortion. If grandma dies o…
/r/MensRights02/04/24 10:37 AM
2

Killing babies in utero is nasty. Why is it immoral to kill kids after they are born? Why not just support infanticide? And don't tell me that no "babies" are aborted, abortion is legal in many states up until term birth. Puke. And most surgical abortions kill things that have a head and face and arms and legs and heartbeats. Even medical abortions at home are traumatic to husbands, who see the blood and tiny embryo go into the toilet. Y'all are sick.
/r/MensRights01/04/24 10:12 PM
5

Agreed. You got my attention with your bait title, but indeed, a fetus is not "her body" in any way whatsoever, not genetically or immunologically or biologically or ontologically.
/r/MensRights01/04/24 12:26 PM
21

Liberalism is devolving into psychopathy.
/r/MensRights01/04/24 07:40 AM
8

It's hard to align feminism with anything that I believe in. You made a caricature straw man argument about my reasons for opposing abortion and supporting capitalism, for example.
/r/MensRights31/03/24 10:37 PM
37

The ADL is a hate group, just as the SPLC is a hate group.
/r/MensRights30/03/24 11:56 PM
1

Hmmm....so you're saying that a woman might call another woman big and beautiful sarcastically? I know women can be mean to each other, but I don't think they tolerate men body shaming any woman at all. I am against all body shaming, but I have seen women do that to men. I have not seen men do that to women, at least not publicly or to their face.
/r/MensRights28/03/24 12:39 PM
2

Interesting idea, gotta think about that more deeply, but there is some truth to it for sure, and it explains some things that I experienced in my life. It certainly explains why body shaming men is ok in their minds, but body shaming even one particular individual woman is an attack on "womanhood."
/r/MensRights27/03/24 02:33 PM
5

I agree. The original article about women hunters apparently claimed that not only did women hunt, but they were BETTER SUITED for it than men. Feminists can't just leave well enough alone, they have to be better than men even when they clearly are not. My bias is that women must have hunted, at least sometimes, food being scarce, and men likely wanting all the help they could get, and women often being without the help of men in many situations. This is much ado about nothing.
/r/MensRights27/03/24 10:54 AM
14

Who cares if women hunted? What does that even prove? So what? Female lions hunt all the time, females of most species hunt all the time. They don't like to starve. Boring.
/r/MensRights27/03/24 12:42 AM
2

I'm all for freedom to practice, but credentials need to be publicly verified and stated out front. And doctors don't deserve to have their salaries determined by government fiat when dentists charge whatever they want, with only free market constraints and insurance constraints.
/r/MensRights26/03/24 05:22 PM
6

Interesting. I agree with your categories: Economic conservative/socially liberal; economic liberal/socially liberal; economic conservative/social conservative; economic liberal/social conservative. I think your category is a bit unique. I can't think of too many people I know who are like that. Most people who are economically leftist are also socially leftist in my experience. Maybe you're what they call a blue dog Democrat? (FWIW, I hate universal healthcare and free education. Hate hate hate…
/r/MensRights26/03/24 12:24 PM
6

It was mostly tongue in cheek as a comparison to how feminists react to similar stories in reverse. Women act like only they are targets of sexual assault. They create safe spaces for women only but there are no safe spaces for men.
/r/MensRights26/03/24 12:12 PM
2

Totally true.
/r/MensRights26/03/24 03:02 AM
65

Women can't be trusted around our boys. It's time to ban female teachers being around boys.
/r/MensRights25/03/24 08:23 PM
1

Men have spoken up against women in male locker rooms, women in all-male clubs and golf courses, and males in women's locker rooms, and males in women's sports. Feminists oppose(d) the men, guess which side won/wins? The feminists. You explain it, I can't. It looks like feminists always win, and it happens without any objections from women.
/r/MensRights25/03/24 08:14 PM
7

The women on that panel are all feminists. Look them up. The entire audience of (nasty) women laughed at what is clearly man-hatred. The fact that a mainstream network would air that nonsense is enough evidence for me that the culture of women in general hates men. No audience of men would react that way if a woman were mutilated, no panel of men would either.
/r/MensRights25/03/24 07:08 PM
4

Really? https://youtu.be/80JqoyaL-p4?si=MjBR2tik-cQYo8Zt Any questions? Just try to imagine a reverse situation. Don't hurt your brain imagining such a thing, it's impossible and you know it.
/r/MensRights25/03/24 06:34 PM
12

The silence from normal women who don't support women barging into men's locker rooms is deafening. I'm sorry, but now you have to deal with what the Sisterhood of Feminists have created. I have zero sympathy.
/r/MensRights25/03/24 08:18 AM
33

WTH? Name another group of people whom a civil leader could pick on so publicly to prevent help for. It's impossible to even imagine. Ef that biotch.
/r/MensRights18/03/24 11:33 PM
4

I was talking to two women about women not saying "thanks" when I hold the door open for strangers at a business location, even when I'm well ahead of them leaving or entering. And they explained to me that they refuse to accept help from a man because he might be "creepy." They don't say "thanks" because making eye contact with a man is an invitation for him to engage them in some creepy manner. This all makes sense to them! I said well "maybe you're biased", and their reply was that they ARE b…
/r/MensRights15/03/24 04:19 PM
4

Taking a contrarian view, breast self-examination is way overrated as a means to detect cancer. Mammograms or MRI screenings (the latter too expensive and slow for routine currently) are much superior. By the time a woman or doctor can feel the mass, it should and could have been detected earlier. A similar situation obtains for prostate cancer. Routine digital rectal exams are being discarded for better screening tests, like PSA and MRI, but again, the latter test is too slow and expensive for …
/r/MensRights14/03/24 02:52 PM
5

Sarcasm is a lost art on the internet.
/r/MensRights14/03/24 02:42 PM
1

TNTC. Do you even know what a regional nerve block is? Holy shit.
/r/MensRights13/03/24 05:09 AM
0

Ridiculous. Yes I've had local anesthetic and it works very well. For circs it can be a regional nerve block. Those are very effective.
/r/MensRights13/03/24 04:54 AM
-4

They give local anesthesia, not sure what more you want on that front. Anesthetized is anesthetized. Find something else to complain about, like bodily autonomy or something like that. Keep it science-y and honest, thanks.
/r/MensRights12/03/24 07:26 PM
5

Wow. News at 11:00! Within any group there are some people who take an extreme position. Who woulda thunk it? The real question at this point is whether feminism as a whole has taken their mission to excess, to where men are now in need of their own "movement". And the answer is yes. The reverse is not even close to being true, so your concern is off the mark. But thanks for the excessively sensitive warning.
/r/MensRights12/03/24 06:58 PM
9

You don't win arguments with ideologues. It's unfortunate, but epistemic certitude is not possible for 99% of the important debates in life. Very few things are provably true, and even if proof is given, ideologues refuse to believe it. Want proof of my idea? (Haha!. It's meant to be ironic) Look at the OJ Simpson trial. Greater evidence against that man could not have been known and demonstrated if God Himself ran the trial. I knew lots and lots of people, otherwise intelligent and accomplished…
/r/MensRights11/03/24 12:51 PM
-9

Interesting hypothesis, not provably true, and belied by basic human biology and psychology and the triablistic history of humanity.
/r/MensRights08/03/24 04:06 PM
-13

How masculine you meant to say. You guys have been so emasculated that you don't even believe in the concept of masculinity any more. Thank you, faminazis, I can't wait for anarchic barbarity to come to your household. You will get what you sowed. Exhibit A is right here, MensRights activists telling women to go get fucked.
/r/MensRights08/03/24 03:45 PM
9

Yep. Thank your fellow feminists and liberals for this nonsense. You can also betcha that your next flat tire on the side of the road will leave you stranded, because no man will want to help you, because of possible fake accusations. That goes for women being actively raped on buses in NYC too. People literally stood by and watched a woman get raped on a bus! Maybe watch the news to see what happens to Good Samaritans. And connect some dots. Do I still stop and help people? Yes, I do. But I'm n…
/r/MensRights08/03/24 03:31 PM
2

Support the second amendment sweetie pie.
/r/MensRights08/03/24 12:57 PM
2

I'm out. Fuck it.
/r/MensRights08/03/24 03:56 AM
1

Barely more than an egg? Bullshit. Most women don't know that they are pregnant until about 8 weeks. Many abortions take place when the fetus would be viable in a NICU, at 25 weeks or greater. At least 8 states allow abortion until term delivery. Term delivery! Planned parenthood studiously avoids determining the age of the fetus, as TESTIFIED by Dr. Nicholason when she was asked in front of Congress. They are paid liars.
/r/MensRights04/03/24 11:28 PM
1

When you develop a coherent philosophy about the ontological nature of human life as compared to non human life, let us know. Until then, stay under your rock and leave civilization alone please and thank you.
/r/MensRights04/03/24 06:54 PM
1

Fake. I'm pretty sure that you attach more spiritual significance to your life than you do to the life of a mosquito. But it is fun to play pretend sometimes; I outgrew pretend when I was about 8 years old.
/r/MensRights04/03/24 06:38 PM
1

The old "rape excuse" that has nothing to do with the abortion debate. A human life is a human life, sorry, that's a fact. Facts are hard things. Deal with them.
/r/MensRights04/03/24 05:45 PM
1

Killing kids is nasty.
/r/MensRights04/03/24 04:59 PM
1

A). "Fetus" is Latin for "offspring". A name doesn't change the ontological essence of a thing. What is aborted almost always has arms and legs and a face and a brain. Most such aborted fetuses could have survived outside the uterus in a NICU. B). Spermatids are not fetuses or offspring. But you knew that, right? An ovum is also not a fetus or offspring.
/r/MensRights04/03/24 03:41 PM
2

So use birth control, don't make a baby and then kill it. Gross.
/r/MensRights04/03/24 03:31 PM
0

How stupid is a person to be unable to avoid making a baby? It's not advanced calculus we are talking about.
/r/MensRights04/03/24 03:10 PM
-5

There's a lot more to MRA than your foreskin fetish.
/r/MensRights02/03/24 02:12 AM
-5

Can't have society without patriarchy.
/r/MensRights01/03/24 08:49 PM
-13

Bring back the patriarchy. Destroy socialism.
/r/MensRights01/03/24 08:25 PM
1

If by "my guy" you mean over any dirty azz DemoKKKRat, that's true. My IQ is too high to vote for a leftist lunatic demented moron.
/r/MensRights29/02/24 07:06 PM
1

I would not do that, even as a private person. Not ever. And Trump is not "my guy". My guy was any person of the field of candidates, with the exception of jeb bush, ahead of Trump. And in this primary season, I prefer Vivek Ramaswamy.
/r/MensRights29/02/24 06:25 PM
1

Cussing at someone online is different from saying "shit", but you knew that. Trump is not "my guy" lol. As I said, a public figure needs to act with more decorum than that no matter which side she is on.
/r/MensRights29/02/24 06:13 PM
1

I never cussed at you. Again, you have trouble making important distinctions. And yes, if you persist in cussing at people here and insulting them, that's puerile. You insult simply because you disagree with me, big difference. Your insults have no point at all.
/r/MensRights29/02/24 05:54 PM
1

I never insulted you or cussed at anybody here personally. You do have trouble with important distinctions. It's called "decorum." If you want to discuss shit, discuss shit. The point is to exchange ideas, not to win arguments. You haven't made any real points. Lots of Burr's fans are disappointed with him.
/r/MensRights29/02/24 05:40 PM
3

No, that's not what I said. He could have apologized. I would have if I were a public figure; my wife would apologize for me if I did that and if she were a public figure. It's called "decorum". Maybe you should learn some. And stop insulting and cussing, it looks puerile and ridiculous.
/r/MensRights29/02/24 05:30 PM
3

How am I full of shit? Burr talks a big game against women acting like qunts but he can't even keep his wife from acting like a qunt in public. My wife would never "let me" flip off, in public, any ex-president no matter how much she or I hated him. ("Let me" is in quotes because it's impossible to physically stop someone in the act, but I would hear about it big time, and I would be expected to apologize). As a public figure, he could have apologized for that crap. I would if it happened to me;…
/r/MensRights29/02/24 05:20 PM
-3

I never said that she couldn't disagree about politics. I said, her fucking behavior was embarrassing. My wife would bust me hard if I did that.
/r/MensRights29/02/24 04:38 PM
-6

Oh, does his wife dislike Donald Trump? Who knew? Oh yeah, she embarrassingly and publicly flipped off the ex-president, a move that leftards would lose their minds over if it were a dirty DemoKKKRat. My wife wouldn't embarrass me that way, nor would I do that to her.
/r/MensRights29/02/24 04:15 PM
9

Piss off a feminist and she calls you an incel, every time. Bill Burr has skits on how women argue that way, although he's just another cuck these days, a sellout. Too bad.
/r/MensRights29/02/24 02:54 PM
47

Stupid reminder. Go remind feminists instead to quit hating on men.
/r/MensRights28/02/24 04:34 PM
1

Twould be better than what we have, a half loaf is better than none at all, agree.
/r/MensRights28/02/24 01:23 AM
4

Privatize the schools, I'll die on THAT hill. Centralization by government leads to propaganda and less freedom.
/r/MensRights27/02/24 08:10 PM
1

What they need is male influencers to make Brits male again.
/r/MensRights27/02/24 04:22 PM
0

Yeah, probably mostly true. Overlapping bell curves lead to lots of debates around psycho- sociological issues.
/r/MensRights26/02/24 05:17 PM
-1

I agree that psychological studies are fraught with all kinds of problems. Most studies are garbage. However, common sense tells me that male animals in general are more physically aggressive than females. Is that always true? No. Don't run across a female grizzly with cubs. Ain't nothing more aggressive (any definition of aggression will do) than that. Otoh, I'd rather run across a pack of female lions than a pack of male lions. As Jordan Peterson says, the bell curves overlap, but the extreme …
/r/MensRights26/02/24 04:24 PM
2

It's part of the electronic health record as required by insurance/govt. It's probably federal agency determined. It's crap.
/r/MensRights26/02/24 04:09 PM
-2

There have been double blind masked observer crossover studies. Look them up. Males of most species are more aggressive than females on average. Just sayin.
/r/MensRights26/02/24 03:55 PM
-2

The shortcoming here being self-reported "aggressive behavior". Not sure that is reliable. They might think that's what should happen so they reported that. Who knows. All I know is that testosterone increases some forms of aggression in the aggregate for males over females.
/r/MensRights26/02/24 02:26 PM
11

That's a terrible recap of the study. Were all participants told that they received testosterone? It's not clear from the article. It says that "women who were told that they received testosterone behaved more aggressively." Were they all told that they received testosterone? Were there four groups? Terrible article.
/r/MensRights26/02/24 09:48 AM
3

Psycho blather, she can't even write well. Awful stuff, and quite histrionic.
/r/MensRights24/02/24 11:15 PM
6

I saw a video of a Saudi woman getting her head chopped clean off with a huge curved sword for committing adultery. If that's your idea of a good place to live, lots of luck!
/r/MensRights24/02/24 08:07 PM
-3

Self-identity is a huge psychological need, and a potentially huge psychological problem. I don't pretend to know if your self-identity as a "loser" (the definition matters here!) is a good idea or not, but as long as you are making a conscious decision to choose an identity, realize that making such a choice is fraught with endless difficulties. Most healthy people don't choose any particular identity but rather make life choices that create a sense of identity for them.
/r/MensRights24/02/24 03:26 AM
6

Well it needed proof, given the strange world that we live in.
/r/MensRights20/02/24 03:05 PM
-2

The giggling shit is a fucking weird tic of women too. Explain that.
/r/MensRights19/02/24 10:50 PM
24

Agreed. They have double standards for sure. Women sport reporters invaded men's locker rooms over 40 years ago, and still do, even at the college level, but the reverse would never happen.
/r/MensRights19/02/24 10:38 PM
-2

I'm pretty sure that I don't believe that I am supposed to be a slave to a woman, Christianity never made me feel that way. I do however believe that I need to subordinate my inordinate desires to God and to others, and if that means subordinating to my family, that's a good thing. Even a secular materialist can see that society depends on a hierarchy of service in support of the culture.
/r/MensRights19/02/24 05:47 PM
24

Absolutely. No matter how good and decent your wife or gf is, when the shtf, she's gonna pull out the rail gun and decimate your sorry azz about your weaknesses, all of them. Women hate hate hate weakness in a man, they can't abide by it. Watch a lion pride if you wanna get some ideas about how females roll with males. Once the male lion is weakened by age or sickness, he's a goner and those biotches will almost eat him alive. He's a sperm donor and protector. That's it. That's the whole game ge…
/r/MensRights18/02/24 04:10 PM
–

You think that all white men are rapists don't you? I knew it. Just admit it.
/r/MensRights18/02/24 01:21 PM
-4

The statement was ridiculous; just admit it and move on. To say that it was hyperbolic would be an insult to hyperbole as a point of argument.
/r/MensRights18/02/24 01:18 PM
1

Hey Reddit why don't YT videos play in the YT app? Pita.
/r/MensRights18/02/24 01:09 PM
-7

Look, it's one thing to state the obvious about racism in America's past (or present), but quite another to claim that a white person [which white person, one out of a million? One out of 100? All white persons?] would say that EVERY Black male they met was a rapist of White women!" Holy shit, now really, are we that racist toward Whites that such a hyperbolic and ridiculous statement can be made these days? Cut the crap. Even the worst racists did not believe that every White Black male had rap…
/r/MensRights18/02/24 01:05 PM
-20

You're "sure that in 1900 a white person would say that every black guy they met was a rapist of white women". Well, it looks like you're just as guilty of making wildly ridiculous and slanderous, prejudicial claims about groups of people as anybody else is capable of doing. Pot, meet kettle.
/r/MensRights18/02/24 10:20 AM
22

Note to self: do not date ugly, mean lady who is 20 years older than I am.
/r/MensRights17/02/24 12:05 PM
1

No, I said that circumcision does not cause significant negative consequences. Whether you believe that bodily autonomy dictates that it not be done on neonates is fine with me. Many men were happily circumcised as neonates, however. Do their opinions matter?
/r/MensRights16/02/24 12:41 AM
1

Cochrane reviews are quite superior to you, sorry. They are the gold standard for evidence-based Medicine; you are just some dude in his underwear typing crap. As for heterosexual HIV, the problem is mainly in Africa. Whether the current rates are "epidemic" or "endemic", they are too high and can be lowered by safe and effective adult circumcision, according to most studies. I'm sorry that bothers you. I like facts.
/r/MensRights16/02/24 12:31 AM
1

Nonsense. A Cochrane review looked at the African studies and all studies and stated that the evidence is that circumcision lowers risk of heterosexual HIV transmission in areas where there are high rates. The WHO supports efforts to circumcise adult males to lower HIV transmission. The study was not done by one man, and whether any of the study participants were Muslim is not germane to the outcome of the study.
/r/MensRights16/02/24 12:19 AM
0

Criminality? wtf? That's nonsense. Adult males are circumcised often, and studies showed no difference in sexual performance or pleasure. Studies in Africa were done with large populations of men and showed no differences.
/r/MensRights16/02/24 12:00 AM
-7

Studies of adult males show no difference when they are circumcised as adults. That's how I know.
/r/MensRights15/02/24 07:12 PM
-16

Hysterical bullshit.
/r/MensRights15/02/24 07:01 PM
1

Well thanks for that, reasonable response.
/r/MensRights15/02/24 06:51 PM
-11

I'm indifferent to it really. I was against it, my wife insisted on it, my boys are happy to be circumcised. It's all just a cultural bias thing, do it or don't, it means not much in my opinion. The intactivist screechers here have some issues they need to see a therapist about. It's all victimhood hysteria.
/r/MensRights15/02/24 06:34 PM
-9

Some of us are happily circumcised.
/r/MensRights15/02/24 06:23 PM
6

Feminists have psychological body issues. Get on r/badwomensanatomy and you will see quickly that those gals have some serious resentments and shame/anger issues. They insult and blame men for all kinds of crap on there. On one hand, they complain that men are stupid and don't know women's anatomy, but on the other, THEY don't even know their own anatomy many times. Even THEY have women get on there admitting that for years they thought that the vagina was the conduit for both urine and menstrua…
/r/MensRights15/02/24 06:12 PM
7

True! And it's just like a woman to go straight to HR instead of acting like an adult.
/r/MensRights15/02/24 02:34 PM
2

Get a job and excel at the job. Learn all there is to learn. Be the best employee. Work forward from there. Go out on your own if the chance arises.
/r/MensRights15/02/24 01:51 PM
40

They're idiots. Some nurse over at r/nurses site was complaining that a male nurse was making statements about her figure and her looks while they were at work, and I told her to simply stand up for herself and tell him "cut the crap please". I was told by a commenter feminist female nurse that was terrible advice, that the "victim nurse" needed to go to HR and report the inappropriate male nurse right away. I explained that men don't roll that way, it's best to just stand up for yourself, talk …
/r/MensRights15/02/24 12:30 AM
5

Look on body dysmorphia site, lots of very sad stories and psychological problems and harm. It obsesses people and ruins their whole life. It's very harmful that people do that, and women get away with it all the time, yet they suffer image problems all the time too. Part of the problem is that men compete for pussy and prestige, and men will join in on the body shaming against other men.
/r/MensRights14/02/24 11:44 PM
5

It's a strange reaction by the nurse.
/r/MensRights13/02/24 01:19 AM
12

Sounds weird, but it could be due to prostate enlargement issues in men over 45, but not so much in young men. Otherwise urinary retention after anesthesia is not a sex-specific thing, 4-5% in men, 2-3% in women, and quite variable in rates in studies done. Look up "postoperative urinary retention."
/r/MensRights13/02/24 01:05 AM
3

Um, this level of hero worship is over the top, otherwise, yeah, kudos to his energy and skill and enthusiasm.
/r/MensRights12/02/24 05:33 PM
0

No idea what that is.
/r/MensRights12/02/24 01:54 PM
1

Men should be placed on prophylactic finasteride at age 40 unless there are contraindications. It lowers risk of prostate cancer, it prevents benign prostatic hypertrophy, and it protects your hairline. If such a drug were available to women, women's groups would be going crazy that it's not a routinely prescribed drug for all women. I am shocked that it's not a routine prescription at this point.
/r/MensRights12/02/24 01:47 AM
0

Leftists are hateful racists.
/r/MensRights12/02/24 12:36 AM
2

That's a fair and well-considered post, Thanks.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 07:35 PM
1

Babies don't die in America from neonatal circumcision. They make up crap about SIDS being caused by NC. Baloney.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 05:55 PM
-2

Studies do not show sexual functional loss from circumcision. I'm sorry that upsets you.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 04:50 PM
2

No.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 01:50 PM
0

Female circumcision is not at all equivalent. All medical doctors agree to that idea. A clitoris does not have redundant skin as does a penis. In addition, some women do have clitorises that are deemed to be "too large" for their aesthetic or comfort preferences, and have a reduction. Also, labiaplasty is done for the same aesthetic and comfort considerations by many women. Again, these are comparisons but not exactly the same as foreskin removal in males. Certainly almost no neonatal females wo…
/r/MensRights11/02/24 01:35 PM
-1

There are putative medical benefits, including lower risk of heterosexual HIV. Whether that militates for NC is another matter, it probably does not, but don't pretend that there are no putative medical benefits. See the Cochrane review for the facts. https://methods.cochrane.org/equity/circumcision#:~:text=Does%20it%20work%3F,protective%20effects%20of%20male%20circumcision.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 01:16 PM
1

No, she mistakenly conflated Plan B with abortifacient pills. It's Ignorant, but she made no attempt to limit access to birth control, nor has she stated any interest in doing so.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 12:39 PM
-1

Moron? Obvious facts? Do tell. The facts that I know come from actual studies. The facts that you know come from emotionalism.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 12:14 PM
0

1). That's a study of self-selected persons, not randomized and prospective. Obviously participants can't be blinded to their circumcision status, so they might have preconceptions about how that affected their lives. 2). The results are based on surveys and personal self-assessments of things like sexual frequency and higher sexual libido, such studies are inherently flawed. Interesting to me, the authors posited that circumcised men would have more sexual partners than uncircumcised men, a sta…
/r/MensRights11/02/24 11:44 AM
2

What switch? After the 1964 Civil rights Act was passed, only one Democrat switched parties. The so-called switch is a figment of the Democrat Party imagination. You can make up any crap that you want to, but Democrats have been racists since Andrew Jackson.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 04:23 AM
1

Show me the Medical journal citation. Thanks.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 03:17 AM
1

Show me the medical journal citation. Show me. Then we can talk. Until then, YOU'RE the broken record.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 03:06 AM
1

There was no case study published in this citation posted by the OP. The "medical community" is not even aware of this stupid article. It's not in a medical journal, it is written by a PhD and not an MD, we have no idea how to confirm or deny the claims of this "PhD". He surreptitiously had an mri scan done and "someone" read the thing, and it is not published in a medical journal. It is not a case study. It's garbage.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 02:42 AM
1

Birth control? Show me a Republican who opposes birth control lol. Health care? What health care? Are you saying that republicans oppose doctors and nurses and hospitals? What are you claiming? The Democratic Party had as its enforcement arm the KKK. Fewer Democrats than Republicans by percentage voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Currently Democrats stir up racial hatreds just like back then, pitting Black against White in the worst demagogic fashion imaginable. They are the worst people ever…
/r/MensRights11/02/24 02:31 AM
1

The old Race card. Bullshit.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 01:10 AM
-16

You wouldn't be a little hysterical would you? Arm cut off? Holy shit.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 12:55 AM
1

No, I did not insist that a case study does not exist. I said, now pay attention, that a surreptitious study done by sneaking into an mri machine and having some dude read the thing and proclaim what he saw is not a case study and not publishable. It's crap is what it is.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 12:41 AM
-15

These guys are hysterical. The intactivists are like feminists: totally emotional.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 12:19 AM
1

You posted nothing. The "study" cited here is no study, it's not in a medical publication, and it was a surreptitious use of an mri scan without any IRB approval. It's nonsense.
/r/MensRights11/02/24 12:09 AM
1

I have never read a fake medical study like that published in a real publication. You are just wrong.
/r/MensRights10/02/24 10:28 PM
-33

Studies totally belie your feelings. You are likely just fine, as are millions of circumcised men. Look at studies of men circumcised as adults: they're happy and notice no sexual side effects.
/r/MensRights10/02/24 10:09 PM
-35

Hysterical emotionalism apparently.
/r/MensRights10/02/24 09:51 PM
4

The old "hey let's base our ideas off emotionalism" nonsense. What evidence do you have that there are structural brain changes from this procedure in neonates? Do tell, Einstein.
/r/MensRights10/02/24 09:40 PM
3

Nonsense. You apparently know nothing about statistics, and you certainly know nothing about me or my empathy.
/r/MensRights10/02/24 08:57 PM
0

Empathy? Ffs, we are talking about scientific facts. There have been neonatal circumcisions for centuries. The burden of proof against this on the basis of brain alterations (see that caveat? I am only talking about this fake "study") is on those who oppose neonatal circumcision on that basis. (On THAT BASIS. See that fucking caveat?! I am not arguing for circumcision, I am arguing against a bogus study used as evidence against the practice).
/r/MensRights10/02/24 08:44 PM
-11

Ok but stop the science pretense.
/r/MensRights10/02/24 08:20 PM
-18

That's not a study. PhD my azz. It was an n of 1 patient, and we have no idea who read the report. It needs a masked observer reading and it needs a control group and an n of hundreds. It's not even "a start" of a scientific study.
/r/MensRights10/02/24 06:15 PM
11

Never forget that Margaret Sanger was a racist. Never forget that the Democrat Party was the party of slavery. Never forget the Republicans believe in individual rights and Democrats believe in collectivism. Never forget that feminists are collectivists and promote socialism and identity politics and DIE and NOT a meritocracy.
/r/MensRights10/02/24 03:26 PM
1

Nazis were Leftists and Socialists. Once you understand that a lot of light bulbs should go off inside your head.
/r/MensRights10/02/24 02:43 PM
16

Good question, well stated.
/r/MensRights10/02/24 01:49 PM
14

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Lock her up.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 10:46 PM
45

Meh. Don't try to make her happy, that's a fool's errand. Just live your life. I gave my wife everything and all I got was grief and a really great maid. I could afford a maid.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 10:07 PM
30

Male feminists are the worst. Get them in front of a girl they wanna fck, and the White Knight knuckles come out. That's really all they want, is the Big P.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 07:49 PM
1

History is what it is, replete with conflicts and civilizational destruction and collapse and domination by outside forces. If you want that for you and yours, you're a simpering wimp. I don't want that. If and when foreign combatants are running through your streets killing mostly the adult men, will you stand up and fight or spread your legs? It's your choice. I didn't invent the world, I merely adapt to it.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 03:34 PM
1

I am a man, I support men, I have many male friends, we have plenty of issues that we despise about feminism. Your beef is with biological and existential facts. We live in a fallen and broken world where men need to be protectors of their civilization. That's a burden that is imposed on us from reality itself. Sorry. Male combatants are chosen from the best and most physically competent. There are Bell curve distributions, and male combatants are chosen from the extreme end of the bell curve fo…
/r/MensRights07/02/24 03:16 PM
0

Women can't keep up. They just can't. There might be some who can, but in general....they can't. They don't. They're a drain on the men.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 03:06 PM
-1

Silly. Ask any male soldiers how that has worked out. It has not.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 02:55 PM
0

Um, what? I despise feminists.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 02:18 PM
-1

Men belong in combat, women are best with kids. That's just how it is. Of course at the individual level anybody should have a choice, but at the cultural and collective level, you're fucking with nature and ruining your military and child-rearing.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 02:04 PM
-2

Do you want women to fight in combat? Men to stay home feeding babies? Women jackhammering concrete? Men teaching preschool?
/r/MensRights07/02/24 01:48 PM
1

Well I told you that I can be obtuse! No worries lol.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 01:01 AM
1

Yeah on my third read I saw my mistake....sorry.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 12:50 AM
0

I have abject contempt for Leftist White Knights. That label of White Knight has never been applied to me lol, but I guess you are calling me that based on my belief that Men are the physical protectors of society in general and women and children in particular. I sympathize with that position somewhat, primarily because I loathe feminism and its anti-male nonsense, and it's natural to hate what hates you. But the fact is that gender roles worked very well for millennia, and you can't fuck with …
/r/MensRights07/02/24 12:27 AM
1

Explain. I could be obtuse, or you could be abstruse, or both ideas could be true.
/r/MensRights07/02/24 12:09 AM
-4

Yep.
/r/MensRights06/02/24 10:11 PM
-3

I'm pretty sure that gender roles worked for most of human existence, like 99.9999% of it. Fuck with nature at your own peril.
/r/MensRights06/02/24 10:01 PM
9

Forever. The so-called "aggrieved" never feel not aggrieved, they want privileges handed to them and not earned. If men have privileges, it's because they were earned. How do I know? Because men live in a competitive world and most men have no apparent privilege other than to work like crazy to get anything. Most men are very NOT privileged. This whole debate ignores the reality for most men, including and especially the dreaded White Male.
/r/MensRights06/02/24 03:07 PM
1

They don't circ unstable preemies.
/r/MensRights06/02/24 05:03 AM
2

You have to divorce yourself from the wider culture in some ways. Don't go to their movies, don't watch Netflix, stop drinking their beer, don't support Disney etc. My protest is minimal, but if enough of us boycott this garbage.... I refuse to go along.
/r/MensRights03/02/24 12:50 PM
5

The peculiar thing is that you felt the need to state the "more-than-obvious". General misandry in the culture must be worse than I thought! It's good to know that men aren't worthless, but crazy to think that needed to be said!
/r/MensRights01/02/24 11:29 AM
-6

Did you notice any loss of sexual satisfaction or sensation post circumcision?? I have tried to argue with the intactivists that it makes no difference, as STUDIES have shown, but they lose their minds if someone says that.
/r/MensRights01/02/24 03:15 AM
1

The leaders want disruptions of any and all kinds so that there will be collapse of most social structures, and then they can achieve oligarchic power. It's a slow revolution by internal destruction. The French Revolution is what they want, but just like the French Revolutionaries, they don't really know what they are ushering in and who or what will achieve power, or what exactly the end goal looks like. They want abject and total "Socialism" with oligarchs at the top. Theu don't want free mark…
/r/MensRights28/01/24 11:23 AM
3

They have no shame because the men in their lives laugh at it too. Feminists circle the wagons. It's crap, men are our own worst enemies.
/r/MensRights27/01/24 04:12 AM
1

Stupidest shit ever. You guys and your foreskin fetish are weird as fuck. And your hatred of Christianity only shows your ignorance of life pre-Christianity. Bring back the colosseum and crucifixion of robbers and tree worship and human sacrifice! Brilliant! You atheist secularists are full of shit.
/r/MensRights26/01/24 10:40 PM
1

Its a losing battle, doesn't mean we can't bitch about it.
/r/MensRights25/01/24 05:29 PM
8

Yeah, young teenaged girls were probably cat-called by young teenaged boys. Yawn. As women grow older, so do the boys, and guess what: the women stop getting cat-called, because older men have more maturity.
/r/MensRights24/01/24 08:20 PM
19

What the hell? This is insane. It's crap. Nobody should be let off for such a crime no matter what the excuse.
/r/MensRights24/01/24 03:54 PM
1

It's ridiculous to outlaw labiaplasty. Look at the subreddit by that name; many women want to do that surgery, for very good reasons. Nobody wants extra tissue that's uncomfortable and causes chafing and pain, stupid activists stick their noses in everybody' business. And I think that most intactivists need to be MUCH less hysterical.
/r/MensRights24/01/24 01:26 AM
-1

That's also my point though. Married men mostly don't get enough time with their kids. What rights will a non married man have? Shit, that's what.
/r/MensRights22/01/24 06:01 PM
1

If that works for you it works for me.
/r/MensRights22/01/24 04:27 PM
2

I had a traditional family in your circumstance. Wife stayed home. Nothing wrong with that. I didn't need her income, WE needed her at home raising the kids. It's strange how that seemed to work just fine until about 60 years ago when women decided that raising their kids meant less to them than having a "career". I had a professional career, retired at age 55, don't miss it, don't need it. Life is short. My kids are happy and healthy and holy, best as I can tell anyway. Maybe the word "holy" co…
/r/MensRights22/01/24 03:42 PM
-16

Ridiculous. Non married people should not be making babies together. It's hard enough to stay in the game if you're married, how da fuk is Dad gonna be around for the kids after a few years of the shit hitting the fan. What if both parties lose interest in being parents, do you give the kids to an orphanage? Lack of commitment is selfish as fuck.
/r/MensRights22/01/24 03:32 PM
2

Cannon fodder most affected.
/r/MensRights18/01/24 05:11 PM
-6

Agree, circumcision is not necessary. But it's also not "mutilation". And no, I'm not getting in the weeds with hysterical lunatics here who have a mental problem about their circumcised dicks. I won't even respond. Millions of men are happily circumcised. That's a fact. Millions more are happily uncircumcised. That's also a fact. It's a boring and useless debate.
/r/MensRights18/01/24 12:44 PM
1

Ok, I just can't listen to this. I like Candace, I believe that some conspiracies are real, but conspiracies around vitamin K deficiency in newborns is nonsense. If you wanna take medical advice from Candace, be my guest. But her "n of 2" babies having zero bleeding problems is not statistically valid at all: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7146284/ There's a lot to these questions and I don't trust Candace to make medical decisions for people. If you want to have a child with a sev…
/r/MensRights18/01/24 11:32 AM
3

lol.
/r/MensRights16/01/24 04:53 PM
4

Better for sure; pronunciation could be a problem.
/r/MensRights16/01/24 04:47 PM
13

That's a great line. Too bad you're not Euripides or Plato or somebody whom we can quote in textbooks. "As Alvaro_T_Zero said on Reddit...."
/r/MensRights16/01/24 04:30 PM
101

If they don't joke about your height, they joke about your dick size, your hair or lack thereof, anything and everything. Do the same to women and they cut your dick off and all laugh about it. They literally laugh about men getting their dicks cut off by angry females.
/r/MensRights16/01/24 03:56 PM
1

The "study" used malpractice databases. That's not a study. That's cherry picking without any matched cohorts for comparison. One would need a matched group of patients looked at prospectively to determine anything at all. It's not even a study, it's propaganda masquerading as a study. They extrapolated numbers too, utter nonsense.
/r/MensRights16/01/24 09:20 AM
1

Totally correct. Absolutely. It is quite true that women sometimes present with vague abdominal pain when suffering a myocardial infarction. If every person with nausea and/or vomiting and/or heartburn were treated as though she was having a "heart attack".... It's also true for men, but as you noted, men have the more classic symptoms. Medical care quality is very hard to measure and study. That analysis was ridiculous. There was a Major "unmatched group comparison." I'm not sure that you can c…
/r/MensRights16/01/24 09:10 AM
1

Probably "other sciences?" Who knows, it's an article meant to stir up shit.
/r/MensRights15/01/24 09:28 PM
2

From the article: "At GCSEs, there were only five subjects where males were the highest achievers – maths, economics, physics, ancient history, and 'other sciences'. " That's what they said, and if true, completely demolishes the concerns raised.
/r/MensRights15/01/24 08:38 PM
51

I don't see the fascination with that pop singer or any celebrity. I like my car mechanic and plumber and doctor and heating and cooling technicians a lot more, they actually fix shit that I need fixing.
/r/MensRights15/01/24 06:58 PM
0

Boys outperform in all the important and "real" subjects, like science. Talk about cherry picking data.
/r/MensRights15/01/24 06:18 PM
1

Great point. We need to incentivize remediation efforts.
/r/MensRights15/01/24 03:59 PM
3

In the subjects that matter, boys do better.
/r/MensRights15/01/24 03:22 PM
1

I think this troll is being sarcastic. He blocked me, that's typical for leftists.
/r/MensRights14/01/24 03:06 PM
0

Holy fuk.
/r/MensRights14/01/24 01:42 PM
0

What? You marry a spouse, you don't marry your parents. Their opinion might be worthy of consideration, but it can't supersede your own. Gotta grow up and be your own man.
/r/MensRights14/01/24 10:51 AM
13

Why are you re-stating that which the article addresses quite specifically as part of its methodology to do a study to better approximate the actual rate, according to it definition of "sexual victimization? : "In a sample of 1124 British heterosexual men, we found a high rate of sexual victimization by women. Overall, 71% of participants reported experiencing some form of male sexual victimization by women at least once during their lifetime. These results were higher than those reported in the…
/r/MensRights14/01/24 10:30 AM
5

Call it DIE.
/r/MensRights12/01/24 12:23 PM
2

I told you, they're irresponsible and stupid. And the 99.99% is at a minimum. It's higher than that even, if used as directed. And if you add a condom, it's near zero chance of getting pregnant. It sure as fuck is not failure of birth control that drives the huge numbers of abortions. There are some really stupid and irresponsible people in this world. I've interviewed a lot of them. They don't use their BCP or condoms. Some even use abortion as birth control. There are women I've met who have h…
/r/MensRights09/01/24 01:51 AM
3

No. BCP used as directed are 99.99% effective. Add a condom and nobody's getting pregnant. People are irresponsible and stupid as fuck.
/r/MensRights09/01/24 01:38 AM
14

Not assault. Self defense.
/r/MensRights08/01/24 05:43 PM
-4

Yeah that's really the main reason there is abortion isn't it bud? Holes in fucking condoms. Do you sell used cars?
/r/MensRights08/01/24 02:05 PM
-5

I never wanted to kill my kids. I love my kids. If you don't wanna love your kids, don't create them, it's not rocket science to NOT have kids. A monkey could figure out how to not make a baby.
/r/MensRights08/01/24 11:45 AM
11

The audience reaction was shocking to me. Is the world full of Jezebels?
/r/MensRights07/01/24 10:16 AM
1

The audience reaction is disgusting. The nasty Jezebels all screamed approval of men dying. Witches.
/r/MensRights07/01/24 10:04 AM
0

I already stuck a fork in that shit-show feminist crap movie franchise after Kathleen Kennedy ruined it. Fuck them. Fuck Disney. None of my money will support that feminist trash company.
/r/MensRights04/01/24 03:13 PM
1

That b!tch needs to get a big fat dildo and ram it up her azz.
/r/MensRights04/01/24 02:53 PM
15

It's nonsense. More clown world leftist crap.
/r/MensRights03/01/24 02:21 AM
40

Crazy lunatic feminists. I can't imagine a mirror image center directed against toxic femininity.
/r/MensRights02/01/24 04:53 PM
10

She's a real peach.
/r/MensRights02/01/24 03:38 AM
-7

That's hilarious. First thing is that it's a very feminine thing to get someone banned for BadThink. Second thing is that feminists can't stand to be in my company for more than two minutes, but I'm working on it. They learn soon enough that I'm allergic to feminism.
/r/MensRights01/01/24 08:23 PM
-12

Whew. Bye! Here's your hat and gloves, sorry to see you leave, don't let the door hit you on the way out of this sub. Did I say goodbye and good riddance? Bye!
/r/MensRights01/01/24 07:18 PM
3

I only coast through hard right turns when I don't know what gear I want after I'm almost through the turn. Otherwise I'm in a gear.
/r/MensRights01/01/24 05:31 PM
1

Fuck you first.
/r/MensRights22/12/23 11:23 PM
0

Bingo!
/r/MensRights22/12/23 04:33 PM
-4

Stop the hatred on trad cons on this site. What exactly is the alternative plan? Let's hear it. Because if the alternative is EQUALITY, then you're just like a feminist, but with a bias toward men "winning" and women "losing" in the battle of the sexes. Does anybody really believe that society benefits if we go to a pure meritocracy and equality in Sports? Because women can't compete in almost ANY sport, and that includes PING-PONG and BILLIARDS! They can only win in a women's style gymnastics c…
/r/MensRights21/12/23 04:08 PM
1

Fuck your equality. Women are not equal. Women can't compete equally in sports or military or police or even work output in Surgical specialties. Women are less productive in Medicine and that's just a fact. Almost half of female MDs quit after 10 years of practice.
/r/MensRights20/12/23 03:29 PM
1

Not likely lol. Crazy take.
/r/MensRights20/12/23 03:16 PM
13

Psycho bitch.
/r/MensRights20/12/23 03:39 AM
3

No, separating the genders allows people to feel comfortable without opposite sex judgment. Do women want men to watch them pee in a toilet? No. Do men want women ogling their dicks at a urinal? No. What is your malfunction?
/r/MensRights20/12/23 03:14 AM
1

That's the damn truth. The double standard about female sexual abuse directed at men is crazy. They really have no introspection about how wrong the double standard is. If a female nurse snaps a photo of a male patient, she might get fired. If a male practitioner does that to a woman, he's probably getting prosecuted for sexual abuse.
/r/MensRights20/12/23 03:01 AM
-5

True.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 10:50 PM
9

It's a bullshit double standard. There's no reason for a woman to be in the men's locker rooms. I support gender roles, and double standards like no women in combat roles. Why? Because it makes sense to have only men in combat. Women are less capable of combat. If the choice were between old men and young women in combat, by all means, have young women in combat. But that's not the choice. Women don't need to be in men's locker rooms. Presumably they don't want men in theirs for fear of men; why…
/r/MensRights19/12/23 08:35 PM
-1

There can't be equality because there isn't equality.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 08:15 PM
-1

I don't understand your point. Feminists hate gender roles.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 08:03 PM
-3

Um, I said that he was acting feminine.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 07:44 PM
-4

How can you run a society without men being men and women being women? I don't understand that. A lion pride is the way it is because it works. Males have to be males, females have to be females.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 07:03 PM
-3

The all caps didn't help. I hate much of what society is doing to men. Hate hate hate. But the Left hates men, that's why things suck. The solution is not more feminism.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 06:52 PM
-3

You go forever and a day.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 06:36 PM
-3

You go first.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 06:13 PM
-12

"You don't belong here". I can't think of a more feminine way of viewing a sub. Holy shit, are you the Mean Girl leader of your little high school clique?! Dammit this is pathetic.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 06:01 PM
-11

How can you protect your family if your wife or daughters or sisters are conscripted?
/r/MensRights19/12/23 05:49 PM
-30

Liberal men are starting to dominate this MRA sub. Y'all need to get a hold of your testicles and ask the Good Lord why he gave them to you, because you sure as hell don't need them. Whining about circumcisions and conscription when the real issue is getting back to traditional gender roles. I'm fucking sick of this shit. Y'all said that you would not even stop a rapist in Mid-Rape mode! Bunch of fucking video-gaming schlub pussies who are too scared to get married and have children. Cut the cra…
/r/MensRights19/12/23 05:30 PM
1

He blocked me again. Typical.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 07:43 AM
0

Imagine being so childish that you can't engage in open dialogue and discussion about scientific facts. The weight of the evidence is against you so you insult and then block me. It's ridiculous, you're ridiculous.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 07:33 AM
0

"Paul Allen Comments" blocked me from responding. Weird. He hates the truth. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=70&q=circumcision+sensitivity&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5#d=gs_qabs&t=1702961955647&u=%23p%3DfEAOWYMcPL0J
/r/MensRights19/12/23 05:00 AM
0

Studies that randomized large groups of men showed no statistical differences. I'm sorry that bothers you. I don't think I'm the one doing the whining.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 04:31 AM
0

It is my only point. It is not mutilating. Shall I repeat that a bunch of times, or can I just say it once? A circumcised penis functions identically to a non circumcised one based on the studies of adults who have been circumcised as adults.
/r/MensRights19/12/23 04:18 AM
12

How do you do one without the other? Do Tell. In the real world, it is openly and blatantly anti white male. Specifically. Openly discussed in meetings and memos. Fuck that shit.
/r/MensRights17/12/23 02:47 PM
-8

When a marriage gets into a tit for tat dispute over who does more and contributes more, the marriage is in trouble. Most marriages work with a division of labor. Some work with equal parts of equal labor, but that's really hard to achieve if there are different careers, different levels of motivation for cleaning the house (I can accept a little messiness)....and once there are kids to take care of, division of labor automatically and quite reasonably tilts toward Mom taking care of the little …
/r/MensRights17/12/23 02:17 PM
1

I don't have a viewpoint. Holy fucking shit how many times do I have to say that. Here's my viewpoint: ITS NOT FUCKING MUTILATING. That's it. Comprende?
/r/MensRights16/12/23 10:36 PM
1

There are other studies, plenty of them. Cochrane reviews are very good. They believe that the studies show lower rates of HIV transmission in Africa after adult males were circumcised, with a control group, and the men accepted the procedure because they notice no difference. I don't know what else to say! Facts are facts. I don't discount studies just because I don't like the results. I asked some friends about this after I got flamed here, and they are happy they are circumcised. Of course, m…
/r/MensRights16/12/23 10:25 PM
-4

I'm ok with much of that except the cholesterol nonsense. Familial hypercholesterolemia causes young ppl to have myocardial infarctions. That's not debatable. Statins lower the risk of myocardial infarctions in diabetics. Unless there is an unknown epiphenomenon, lower cholesterol lowers risk of MI. I'll stay on my statin.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 05:25 PM
1

Here's what is strange about you people. You would be fine with me choosing to chop the kid up in utero if the Mom wanted the kid chopped up, but once the kid is born, "how dare you cut his foreskin!" Um, just a week ago you would have been ok if I cut his head open with a blade and sucked his brains out, and morcellated his body to pieces. Morcellate: Verb morcellate (surgery) To break into small pieces, prior to removal
/r/MensRights16/12/23 03:13 PM
1

That's strange. People sky dive and I don't give a shit if they all quit tomorrow or keep doing it. Am I a skydiver supporter lol!? I don't give lessons, I don't belong to an organization that promotes it, I don't advertise it, I don't sign up for classes, i don't vote to allow it or vote to disallow it. If they wanna sky dive they can do that, if they don't, that's fine with me. So no support. Does your jockstrap support your balls? Yeah, it physically does something. I don't physically do anyt…
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:58 PM
1

It's not black and white because there are medical benefits. And it's not mutilating so I am indifferent. It's not that complicated. Do it or don't, I don't give a shit.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:43 PM
1

Weird take. Indifference is not support.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:41 PM
1

I don't care if people do it or not. I'm not King of the World. Libtards wanna be King. No thanks.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:11 PM
1

I'm neutral. Deal with it. It's not mutilating.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:10 PM
0

Feelings? That's for feminists. I'm talking science. It's not mutilation. That's all I said. Deal with facts.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:10 PM
1

Circumcision is not mutilating. I do not "support" it, I do not condemn it. Get a brain.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 12:56 PM
0

Yeah so I don't pierce my kids' ears, never have. But other parents do that; talk to them, not me. As for circumcision, I said that it's not mutilating. I did not say that it should be done, or should not be done. Pay attention to the argument at hand and not your straw man stuff. Thanks.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 12:54 PM
0

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41443-020-00354-y Try to be less emotional and more circumspect in your language to other people, you'll be happier and so will they. Thanks.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 10:12 AM
1

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41443-020-00354-y
/r/MensRights16/12/23 10:10 AM
1

I posted a review study. There are subsequent ones. I don't like dueling study debates but there it is.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 09:51 AM
1

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3881635/#:~:text=Overall%2C%20the%20results%20revealed%20no,desire%2C%20orgasm%20difficulties%20and%20dyspareunia.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 09:51 AM
-4

Punder Man blocked me. What a tool. Local anesthetic is used. He clearly knows nothing about Medicine. I never said "general anesthesia" lol. Holy crap the ignorance.....
/r/MensRights16/12/23 09:49 AM
-1

You should not do that. Reddit lends itself to ppl who pile on to virtue signal to everybody how nice and wonderful they are. I made a simple point. It's not mutilating. You can stomp your feet all you want to.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 09:35 AM
1

Ok, but it is what it is, and I'd bet that an orgasm is an orgasm.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 04:49 AM
1

Those are meaningless comparisons since studies show no difference in sensitivity post circumcision and no loss of function. Your comparisons are stupid. Many ppl prefer the aesthetics of circumcised penises. It's subjective. Nobody prefers people without a tip of the nose. Your other comparisons are too retarded for words.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 04:46 AM
1

But studies show no loss of sensitivity. That's just a fact.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 04:42 AM
1

You don't comprehend English. I don't want it for other kids, but if their parents want it, I don't care. See how that works Einstein? I don't promote it or WANT it done, I am indifferent if it is done. Holy shit you're slow.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 04:41 AM
-1

Whether it should be done or not is up to the parents. Do you support abortion? Why is it ok to kill a fetus but not ok for parents to do a circumcision? That's really stupid.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 04:38 AM
1

And fuck you first. You're a dick.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 04:36 AM
1

It is not mutilating. If the organ functions normally, and provides the same sexual pleasure, the organ is not mutilated. You're cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 04:36 AM
1

I opposed it for my kids, I am indifferent to it for other kids. See how that works genius? It should not be routine, meaning, a routine thing imposed on people. You're slow as fuck.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 04:34 AM
0

I never flip-flopped on anything. I believe in men's rights. Now pay attention, because you don't get to make up shit. I said: circumcision is not mutilating. Can you understand basic science and English? If not we can go over it again. Over and over until you get it straight. The penis functions just as well with or without foreskin, therefore, not mutilating. Now does that mean I promote it for newborns? No. Does it mean that I want my kids to be circumcised? No. Does it mean that I want other…
/r/MensRights16/12/23 04:07 AM
0

False. I don't like hysterical lunatics making up false victimhood narratives that go against medical science. I oppose routine neonatal circumcision, but not strongly. To each their own. This sub is being brigaded by lunatic intactivists. Fuck that.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 03:51 AM
1

You're so stupid that you don't think that the WHO knows how to design a fucking HIV transmission study with the concern that you raised?! You're a special kind of stupid.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 03:39 AM
1

They randomized patients then followed them over a long period, well past the recovery from the surgery period. You're no Einstein, that's for sure. The study designers are not that stupid, maybe you are? Cochrane review is done by experts, read the thing if you're so smart. One study parameter was sexual functioning of the circumcision group. There was no difference.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 03:34 AM
-1

No. In Africa they randomized some to surgery, some to no surgery, and showed that there were lower rates of HIV transmission in those circumcised. Randomization means not self selected.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 03:23 AM
-1

I am using adults to determine if sexual function is altered. It is not. You're kind of not getting it at all. Pay attention: I am not arguing for it to be done. Can you get that through your fucking head?
/r/MensRights16/12/23 03:09 AM
18

lol. That's a good post! It's kinda funny and quite believable. Bravo.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 03:04 AM
1

We are not discussing whether I believe it should be done to neonates. We are discussing whether it is mutilating. It is not. Pay attention.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 03:02 AM
-1

The first statement is false. The second one is true in the narrowest sense. But that is argumentum ad verecundiam and I don't do that, I do scientific studies. These are peer-reviewed studies. The ones in Africa done in Africa and supported by WHO show the same thing. Cochrane review showed that the evidence is that HIV transmission rates go significantly down with adult circumcisions. The short-term complication rate was up to 5%, but included things like bleeding; long-term showed no loss of …
/r/MensRights16/12/23 03:00 AM
1

Well the adults who get circumcised are happy. I don't know what else to tell you. If that makes you mad, then reality is not for you. Try a new planet.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:50 AM
-1

Typical. Make claims. Deny counter claims. Demand studies. Get studies, deny studies. Holy fuck. Feminists are no more ridiculous.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:49 AM
1

I cited a review for you in one post. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3881635/#:~:text=Overall%2C%20the%20results%20revealed%20no,desire%2C%20orgasm%20difficulties%20and%20dyspareunia.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:46 AM
1

I'm not so sure. Lots of men are circumcised in this world and they don't feel cheated. Some guy here said he was cut as an adult and felt no different.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:45 AM
1

I never said that! Holy fuck. I said IT'S NOT FUCKING MUTILATING. I did not say "do it", or that you should do it.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:44 AM
0

No, studies show what I say. You can't just go by histology. Good grief.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:11 AM
1

You have body dysmorphia. Let it go. You're fine. Ask men who got cut as adults. You're fine. I realize that it was imposed on you, but it doesn't mean that you have to be unhappy.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:10 AM
-3

I think your organ of perception and cognition is deficient if you wanna know the truth. The foreskin is partial skin of an organ, not an organ per se. All of the skin is called "an organ" but the entirety of skin is the organ, a partial resection is not called an "organ removal" lol. Holy shit. If you have a biopsy of skin or a partial resection, nobody says that the "organ of skin" was removed. For fuck sake.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 02:02 AM
1

Ok. But histology doesn't always prove functional changes at all. The skin doesn't all disappear lol. Almost all teenaged boys who are sexually active seem to do just fine whether cut or not. Same with adult men who are cut as adults. Just accept that.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 01:58 AM
-1

Neutral to opposed. I don't like pierced ears aesthetically, so there's that, but I would NOT try to stop any mother or father from doing it. It's personal preference in my opinion. And really, it's all just personal opinions aesthetically about circumcision; and as far as risk-benefit goes, I would say that routine neonatal circumcision is probably not "worth it", but in certain circumstances it is medically helpful. And not mutilating.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 01:56 AM
-6

No, it's not the removal of a sexual organ. It is the removal of the foreskin, which apparently is unimportant to sexual functioning as shown in studies.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 01:53 AM
-1

Yeah. So there have been subsequent studies. Look them up. Start with a Cochrane review of the question of whether it lowers HIV transmission rates.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 01:51 AM
-1

Apparently not. It matters whether it is clinically detectable by the patient, and it's not, so..... This is all very strange. If the procedure really were mutilating, we would know that by now. Jews are not stupid people, and men do it to men, so there doesn't seem to be a problem. Do it or don't. I don't care, but it is not mutilating.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 01:50 AM
-12

Fuck you first. There are putative medical benefits to circumcision. They probably do not militate for the routine procedure on neonates. But it is NOT FUCKING MUTILATING.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 01:33 AM
-1

None of that supersedes anything that I know. Studies of men in the real world show that the procedure is tolerated well with very low complication rate and is not mutilating. I posted the meta analysis review of studies. It's just a fucking fact. You don't like medical facts apparently.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 01:29 AM
-5

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3881635/# It doesn't matter, it's not mutilating.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 01:16 AM
1

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3881635/#:~:text=Overall%2C%20the%20results%20revealed%20no,desire%2C%20orgasm%20difficulties%20and%20dyspareunia.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 01:05 AM
-1

I don't want your son cut or uncut. I said, now pay attention: it is NOT MUTILATING TO CUT. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3881635/#:~:text=Overall%2C%20the%20results%20revealed%20no,desire%2C%20orgasm%20difficulties%20and%20dyspareunia.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 01:04 AM
1

If adult men are circumcised as adults, guess what? They can tell the difference if there is any, and there isn't. That's what the surveys of men circumcised as adults show.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 12:54 AM
-1

Of course not everyone is happy, but statistically, there is no significant difference in levels of happiness for sexual pleasure or functioning before or after circumcision when large populations are tested.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 12:48 AM
0

No, they skipped the lobotomy on me when I was born due to my thick skull. But it does serve me well in these useless debates with feminized MRAs who like to claim victimhood because they lost their foreskins.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 12:16 AM
0

The studies show that adults circumcised as adults are happy with their sex lives and notice no loss of pleasure (statistically; in the individual case, there are of course some unhappy patients).
/r/MensRights16/12/23 12:12 AM
-6

No, studies show that adult men circumcised as adults are happy with their functioning. People who need it done for paraphimosis are also quite happy. People circumcised as neonates don't have anything to compare it to, but they are happy with their sex lives and reproduce just fine. So I'd say that "mutilation" is hyperbolic femme boy bullshit.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 12:11 AM
-1

You can do local anesthetic injection for circumcision or a dorsal penile nerve block. Most Pediatricians do not do routine circumcisions. OB-gyns and urologists do them. I'm sorry that as an "anesthesia provider" that you know so little about medical practice in America.
/r/MensRights16/12/23 12:08 AM
-1

Ok.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 11:45 PM
-2

Not really. I have done so lots of times in this forum, it's tedious and then activist people deny the scientific studies. Since it is acceptable medical practice based on those studies, I'd say that the burden of proof is now on the side of intactivists to demonstrate any harms, given all the voluminous studies that are in support of the practice, or neutral about it. Thanks for your ongoing concern though, I'm touched just knowing that people care about foreskin.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 11:36 PM
-2

Has been. State laws determine that. Tell your legislators to disallow that.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 11:32 PM
-1

It's ok to dislike me, I dislike me too, but I can't do anything but tell the truth. All the evidence is that circumcision leaves men quite functional and content with their sex lives. It makes me mad too, let's get really mad about it!
/r/MensRights15/12/23 11:31 PM
1

I don't generally like them either. I agree about the general attitude against the WHO. But the studies are what they are, darn the luck.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 11:30 PM
0

I'm glad for you.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 11:29 PM
1

No, I'm not a cunt. I trust the studies.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 11:28 PM
1

No, I do not. I said, now pay attention, this is complex, I know you can do this: it is not mutilating. See how that works? It's called arguing the point and not a straw man.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 11:05 PM
1

It's not mutilating. Studies show that the organ works the same. Sorry. I want to be as unhappy as you are, but I can't do it.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 11:04 PM
-6

Ok. Now read my original post and ask yourself if you are arguing against anything that I said.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 11:02 PM
0

Where is the hypocrisy? Routine circumcision is not mutilating. No hypocrisy in saying that.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 10:51 PM
1

No, because studies say so. Look them all up your damn self.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 10:50 PM
-22

Your post didn't say shit, that's "how come" I did not know that. If you had a complication, that's different. It would be like saying that cataract surgery is a "blinding" operation just because YOU had a complication. It is not a blinding operation, it is a very useful and good operation. The analogy falls short in some ways, but the point is that you don't get to call routine circumcision "mutilating" just because you had a complication.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 10:50 PM
-3

Not sure what your comment means or refers to.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 10:41 PM
4

Outrageous. That judge is an idiot.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 10:25 PM
1

True.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 10:09 PM
1

Studies show otherwise. I know it hurts your feelings, but you have to get over your hurt feelings.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 09:51 PM
1

I am saying that studies show no difference in function after male circumcision. I know that bothers you but it is what it is.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 09:32 PM
1

The clitoris is not the vagina. You can't separate the hood without removing a significant percentage of the clitoris, and damaging the glans. There is really no point to removing the clitoral hood, whereas the foreskin does pose problems to the patient sometimes, and increases the risk of UTIs and STD transmission and penile cancer, according to the best studies. FGM often includes WAY more than clitoral hood removal, as you should know......
/r/MensRights15/12/23 09:29 PM
-1

Ok.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 09:16 PM
-1

Different sizes and redundancies and tissue adherence to the glans.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 09:11 PM
1

Look up studies. One man posted here that he noticed no change.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 09:09 PM
2

Thanks! I'm getting blasted and responded in kind lol.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 09:01 PM
-1

No, they are literally embryonic homologues. Same anlage tissue.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 09:00 PM
1

Empathy? For what? It's not mutilating. Sorry that bothers you.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:59 PM
-2

Agreed, thanks.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:57 PM
-2

Well the clitoral hood and foreskin are not convergent evolution. They are homologous. But functionally and anatomically very different. The foreskin is loose and redundant.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:52 PM
-1

Ok, you're a hysterical and emotional person. Get thee to a psychologist.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:40 PM
1

Mea culpa.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:40 PM
-1

Read my first post carefully. Thanks.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:37 PM
1

Ok. That kind of contradicts those who claim loss of special receptors, but if it works for you that good.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:35 PM
2

Sorry. I'm getting slammed and I can't keep up with who is who.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:32 PM
-1

Because of lunatics like you all, that's why.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:31 PM
-1

I don't see how the two organs are analogous despite their homologous embryonic derivation. That would be like saying that a breast reduction is "mutilating" in the same way that removing a functional part is mutilating. It is not.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:30 PM
-2

It's not mutilation because, despite your manifest hysteria, the organ functions just as well, just the same, with equal sexual pleasure as evidenced by studies on adult males. This does not mean that I promote it lol. Good grief y'all are irrational like the feminists.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:26 PM
-3

There are putative medical benefits to the procedure. Some cultures believe in it for religious reasons. I am not one of them.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:24 PM
-1

I said a very specific thing: it is not mutilation. Stay focused.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:21 PM
-4

It is done with anesthesia. It is not analogous to the female version at all, for reasons that I explained elsewhere.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:19 PM
1

That's a reasonable argument. Thanks for that. There are putative medical benefits despite that truth that you mentioned, but on balance I agree that routine circumcision is not mandatory by any means, and possibly not recommended simply because the cost-benefit analysis is not clear. I said that it's not mutilating. That is all I said.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:18 PM
1

The foreskin retracts and represents a redundancy and laxity of tissue that the clitoral hood does not.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:14 PM
1

Ok. Now what exactly does that prove? The clitoral hood is firmly attached to the glans of the clitoris and has no redundancy compared to the foreskin. It cannot be retracted in the same degree or manner as the foreskin can be retracted from the glans of the penis.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:13 PM
-1

I agree about the safe sex idea. I did not do the studies, I do not endorse the idea, I am reporting the results. That doesn't make me an asshole. Adult males do not notice any (statistically significant in the aggregate) difference in sexual pleasure post circumcision.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:04 PM
-1

Do your own research, I get tired of dueling studies and citations. The quality of the studies becomes a huge point of contention. I've done this several times and no matter what studies I cite, all I hear from your side is "that's bullshit".
/r/MensRights15/12/23 08:01 PM
-40

I did more than "work in healthcare". The question is whether it is mutilating. It is not. I am indifferent to the choice but would not choose it for my children.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 06:22 PM
1

Removing the clitoral hood is very different from male circumcision. Do you believe in sex differences? Although they are homologous embryonic tissues, they are not analogous tissues in terms of tissue planes and redundancy after full fetal development.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 06:21 PM
0

Look up WHO recommendations for circumcision on adults to lower risk of HIV. Studies showed that the procedure was well accepted by adult males.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 06:14 PM
1

I do know what I'm talking about, more than you do. Local anesthetic infiltration is given for all kinds of office procedures. All day, every day. Pediatricians don't generally do circumcisions. They are not surgeons. The vast majority are done by OB-gynecologist in hospital settings.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 06:13 PM
2

Not likely. The AAP has stated that anesthesia must be given. Also, pediatricians are not surgeons. Some FP docs do them, but they are not done in the office and that would be malpractice if done that way with no anesthesia.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 06:02 PM
-1

It's not mutilating. I know that you want so badly to be a victim, but it's not very manly to pretend to be a victim.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:56 PM
1

That is false. Most Pediatricians don't do that surgery. OB-gyns and urologists generally do them.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:55 PM
-1

Studies belie that claim. Adults are perfectly happy post circumcision as adults.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:53 PM
0

I hope that you become a rational creature one day. I am indifferent to the practice.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:52 PM
-4

I knew it. Histrionic crap from your side.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:51 PM
-55

Wow, you're stunning and brave. Are you a CRNA?
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:51 PM
-8

I said that it is not mutilating and it is not. The organ functions perfectly well after the procedure, and adults who get circumcised as adults feel no difference. Ergo, not mutilating. It is nothing like FGM.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:50 PM
-13

I did not say that it was "good for me" or "bad for me". I said that the practice is not "mutilating". Details seem to not be your strong suit.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:48 PM
4

That is false about the American Academy of Pediatrics. Their last official statement was in 2012 and was modestly in support of the practice IF THE PARENTS CHOOSE IT. They have not taken a position against the practice.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:47 PM
-27

Ok.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:41 PM
-112

We can argue about circumcision, and there is certainly good argument against the routine practice, but the parameters of the debate can't include tendentious language like "mutilation" when in fact it is not mutilating by any stretch of the imagination. Stop this crap please. It is nothing like female genital surgery. Holy shit grow the fuck up. Just stop this sniveling cry-baby victimhood bullshit. This is a forum for men, not for children. [Addendum: lots of heat and emotion, I post this so p…
/r/MensRights15/12/23 05:13 PM
2

Fuk that bitch.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 02:28 PM
2

"Mean Girls" is a real thing.
/r/MensRights15/12/23 02:18 PM
17

That's false. Force equals mass times (de) celeration. In the case of a car suddenly stopping, a heavy object will strike the dashboard or windshield with more force than a lighter object. Would you rather have an anvil fly into your head, or a pencil, in a collision where free objects are in your vehicle?
/r/MensRights15/12/23 01:02 PM
0

Agreed. Fuck these losers. These are the same femme boys who wanna whine about their damn foreskin being cut off. It's enough to make me give up on these men's rights little twinks altogether. I swear they've been feminized by feminism and don't even know it! They refuse to grow up, get married , and raise a family. Bunch of pathetic video-gaming twerps.
/r/MensRights14/12/23 03:21 AM
1

It's shocking that this is even being debated. The end of civilization is here.
/r/MensRights14/12/23 03:15 AM
-1

Your (not you're, wait for the sentence....) being intentionally daft is not worth my responding to. And no, I do not think I am brave or heroic, far from it. But basic human decency is basic human decency.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 08:03 PM
2

Well if you have a heart condition then I'd say that gives you license to avoid playing "hero". But if it were to fall on me to stop a guy from raping a person, and I was able to do so, I would find it strange to be called a "hero". Is it heroic to be a basically decent human? I don't think so.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 07:16 PM
1

Ok. But that has nothing to do with this discussion.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 04:13 PM
-2

These are very specific and very debilitating medical conditions that Medicaid deems necesssary. Medicaid pays shit, and they are always looking at cost-benefit. A young person on kidney dialysis vs a childhood circumcision? Get a clue. You guys have reached the point of feminist shrieking insanity. Cut the crap. A patient with spina bifida has bigger worries than his fucking foreskin. He is in a fight for his life. He is looking at major debilitation from possibly being wheelchair bound and cat…
/r/MensRights13/12/23 02:50 PM
-2

Dude. If you knew anything about spina bifida and renal failure, you would understand why this is a medical thing. The level of insanity among intactivists is scary. Men are not supposed to be screeching little whiners about nonsense fake oppression in the way that feminists are doing. I swear the men here are getting feminized and don't even know it. Use your brain: spina bifida is a crippling/disabling condition that kills people slowly. Loss of kidneys is a big deal. Anything to lower that ri…
/r/MensRights13/12/23 02:15 PM
-5

There is no fucking way I'm sitting back watching a man rape anybody. If you fucks here don't have the decency to intervene no matter how big the guy is compared to you, then I'd say that male-ness is dead and society is dead and the dark ages are upon us. Good fucking grief.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 02:00 PM
-4

No, the listed conditions are at risk for significant UTIs and loss of kidneys over time. Anything that lowers that risk is medically necessary. That is not "routine infant circumcision". The OP has no idea what he even posted.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 01:17 PM
-13

Spina bífida. See? The question was about spina bífida.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 12:47 PM
-86

Did you see that there are medical conditions for which this is recommended? Do you know what "medical conditions" means? UTIs can be devastating for those populations. Male circumcision probably (best evidence) lowers rates of male UTIs. This forum really need to cut the crap about male circumcisions; it's not at all analogous to female genital surgery.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 03:22 AM
-62

Ppl with spina bífida have incomplete control of their bladders. UTIs and renal infections are common. Circumcision in boys can lower the risk of UTIs. Spina bífida patients need frequent monitoring of their kidney function. Loss of renal function from repeat UTIs means dialysis. So, anything to help lower that risk is helpful. You freaks conflating FGM with therapeutic male circumcision (done for serious medical reasons) need mental therapy.
/r/MensRights13/12/23 02:51 AM
21

Projection is what Leftists do all the time: "Oh you're a racist". Yeah, look in the mirror Lefty Lunatic.
/r/MensRights10/12/23 07:15 PM
20

It makes no sense. Why aren't there equal numbers of men in OB-gyn any more? Why aren't there more women in roofing and plumbing and underwater welding?
/r/MensRights10/12/23 12:38 PM
3

No, Nazis did not get elected on a platform of killing Jews and starting a war. There was a lot of behind the scenes conspiring. And people can openly conspire to do stuff too. Conspiring can be quite open. So what's your point exactly?
/r/MensRights07/12/23 01:02 PM
4

We now know that the CIA conspired to have JFK assassinated. For years I thought it was nonsense. Boy was I wrong. And the media don't care about it. How crazy is THAT?! I don't think that Democrats care either. What is going on?
/r/MensRights07/12/23 12:47 AM
8

There are people who use their money for political purposes. Soros being one. Is that a tinfoil hat conspiracy idea? Have you heard of "Nazis"? Yeah, you see, there were these people, and they "conspired" to do some really bad shit, like take over a country and start a war against multiple nearby countries, and attack and kill 6 million people, the majority of whom were Jewish. Yeah, and guess what?! People actually believe that a conspiracy took place! Crazy, huh?!
/r/MensRights06/12/23 11:25 PM
48

Freaky. Parity in sentencing is a huge issue that we should insist that judges and feminists adhere to. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
/r/MensRights06/12/23 04:56 PM
5

Victimhood is currency in America. Nobody wants their currency stolen. I see an impasse here unless we get back to traditional roles. I saw a post where some guy here went off on tradcons. And most everybody hated on tradcons. What exactly is the game plan if you hate on traditional gender roles? Society has to have soldiers and police and firemen and dads and moms.... We can all "go our own way", but how exactly do you build society THAT WAY?! It makes no sense.
/r/MensRights06/12/23 04:10 PM
1

That is not why circumcision lowers the risk of cancer. It is indeterminate. But whatever the reason, it's a good thing because nobody wants that. Is it a great enough risk reduction to warrant routine neonatal circumcision? Probably not.
/r/MensRights06/12/23 11:23 AM
-1

Fuck these guys. If they wanna cut tradcons out of the men's rights movement, they won't have shit left. What will they stand for exactly, celibacy and hatred of women?
/r/MensRights06/12/23 05:57 AM
-2

Studies belie that statement. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C14&q=effect+of+male+circumcision+on+sexual+pleasure+&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&t=1701821988954&u=%23p%3DfEAOWYMcPL0J
/r/MensRights06/12/23 12:21 AM
-2

I agree that not all men are happy, but those anecdotes are not from large studies as done in Africa. I like real data from real studies: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C14&q=effect+of+male+circumcision+on+sexual+pleasure+&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&t=1701821988954&u=%23p%3DfEAOWYMcPL0J
/r/MensRights06/12/23 12:20 AM
-5

There is an epiphenomenon that lowers the risk of penile cancer in circumcised males. That epiphenomenon is undetermined.
/r/MensRights06/12/23 12:08 AM
-1

What other comments? I keep getting more arguments against me and I respond in kind. I think that you have the obsession. See a shrink.
/r/MensRights06/12/23 12:00 AM
-10

Females do not have redundant foreskin as males do.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 11:59 PM
-6

Anesthetic is routinely used. It's apparent that you don't know what you're talking about. Female genitalia mutilation damages the clitoris and often the vagina too.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 11:56 PM
-1

If you have anything intelligent to say, you would have said it.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 11:54 PM
-9

They're a Victimhood Circle Jerk just like the feminist nutcases that they claim are unhinged.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 11:46 PM
-1

Ok. Take your pills.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 11:10 PM
-3

The studies on UTIs are variable but the weight of evidence is for lower rates post circ. I'd say that the studies on HIV transmission are generally suggestive that circ lower rates of transmission. Same with penile cancer. In balance, it is just as I said:, do it or don't. It's a personal decision. Millions of men are happy that they were circumcised as infants. I'm happy to see that you oppose in utero feticide.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 11:09 PM
1

I said that I do not trust WHO 100% on all things, or even many things.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 11:01 PM
-1

I am quite aware of physiological processes and do not see how that is germane to anything said here. The penis functions quite well after circumcision, just ask people who had it done as adults. HIV transmission is not my theory, it was shown in studies. Those studies have been challenged but not with well done, prospective and randomized large population counter-studies. The WHO still promulgates circumcision for that purpose, but I will admit that I do not trust the WHO in many things. You kn…
/r/MensRights05/12/23 10:54 PM
-3

Eye surgery makes a CT surgeon friend of mine want to faint. That proves nothing.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 10:47 PM
0

I will fuck off as soon as I figure out what that means. I don't care if ppl circumcise or not; I do care if they are insane lunatics who tell lies about the procedure and equilibrate it to FGM and make MRAs look like shrieking femme boys.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 10:45 PM
-1

There is a lower risk of UTIs. It's not so significant as to warrant circumcision of all infants, but in any individual patient, it could be life-saving or prevent significant morbidity. It lowers the risk of STDs according to the WHO and studies in some countries in Africa, where heterosexual HIV is a serious problem. There are other putative health benefits, like no penile cancer and perhaps lower rates of transmission of HPV. It certainly is more hygienic and cosmetically appealing to many wo…
/r/MensRights05/12/23 10:41 PM
-1

Wow. So tell me, how do all those doctors and nurses at hospitals live with themselves, and all those millions of men who have been circumcised?! Why are they all quite happy? Are they retarded? Are they Moral monsters? Because adult men get circumcised frequently, and they don't march on the streets about getting their foreskins back, ya wanker.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 10:18 PM
-5

And do you know the patient's outcome? No. Watching heart surgery on an infant can seem horrible too, and the recovery can be a nightmare. But the outcome is what matters.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 10:14 PM
-1

Ok, and I think that you're ignorant, but not a waste of time, or I would not be wasting my time here.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 09:58 PM
-3

Circumcision can rarely cause serious complications. Exceedingly rarely. As can lack of circumcision. Exceedingly rarely. That's why I don't care one way or the other. I just don't like histrionic losers whining about their foreskin loss.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 09:52 PM
-4

That's nice. Now learn some urology, which has nothing to do with being a CNA, with all due respect. As for mutilation, it's not true "by definition". The organ functions perfectly well post circumcision and the sensation is the same if you believe adult males who had it done. I feel sorry for your need to be a victim, but look for your sense of victimhood elsewhere.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 09:50 PM
-8

You don't know what you're talking about. Study some urology, do some research of medical journals. Work at a urology clinic as a volunteer. Then call me an asshole if I'm lying.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 09:43 PM
-7

FGM involves injuring the clitoris and sometimes the labia and vagina. Male circumcision does not injure the penis. Ask adult men who were circumcised.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 09:33 PM
-7

I guess I can fuck right off. I personally would not choose circumcision for a newborn. But others do and that's their prerogative. It has been done for centuries and has some medical benefits. It is even claimed to lower STD rates. As for "bodily autonomy", that's not a thing. If a child has a medical condition, the parents decide on treatment; even then, the State will overrule the parents if the parents don't do what is medically sound according to the doctors. So bodily autonomy doesn't exis…
/r/MensRights05/12/23 09:32 PM
-63

For centuries men have been circumcised. They do it as adults voluntarily and are happy with the results. It's not at all like FGM. Grow up.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 09:26 PM
4

There is no answer. As Solomon knew, you can't split the baby.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 09:06 PM
-27

If this subreddit is taken over by the intactivist freaks, it's gonna be ruined, because nobody gives a fuck about these freaks and their foreskin fetish. "Muh Foreskin!!! Has anybody seen Muh foreskin??!!! I can't live without it!!!!" Enough with the genitalia obsessed freaks. What a bunch of screeching screwballs.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 08:59 PM
-75

You fuck off first.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 08:48 PM
-106

You're in need of some help. Female genital mutilation is, in its worst forms, extremely different from routine male neonatal circumcision. It strikes me as very strange that you would believe that for centuries, men have done circumcision on boys and men, both adult and neonates, and men somehow couldn't figure out that their dicks were being damaged. Do you really believe that? Because circumcised men are quite happy and functional. Maybe they don't know how much more happy they would be if th…
/r/MensRights05/12/23 08:16 PM
1

Testing.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 03:05 PM
1

Testing
/r/MensRights05/12/23 03:00 PM
7

Agreed! I wish this site would ban all anti-circumcision posts. It's dreary and stupid. We don't all agree, and the emotionalism by their side is off the charts. It's weird, I think they want to be victims. It's like feminism in its need for victimhood and affirmation.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 03:59 AM
1

Since the sensitivity is unchanged after adult circumcision, maybe YOU are the moron? These magical nerve endings must not be magical after all.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 03:21 AM
-16

You're histrionic. And it's not mutilation since the organ works perfectly well after circumcision as evidenced by reproductive success and sexual happiness in Jewish communities and many Christian ones (it's not a religious requirement but it was common in many locales) and Muslim ones for centuries. Urologists do adult circumcisions for medical reasons and the adults are quite satisfied with the results. Studies in Africa to lower HIV transmission rates show high levels of satisfaction in adul…
/r/MensRights05/12/23 03:14 AM
-25

It isn't mutilation, but you are histrionic.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 03:08 AM
-30

Not everybody shares your histrionic opinions about circumcision. How much urology have you done? Zero.
/r/MensRights05/12/23 01:50 AM
1

Conservatives don't shit on their audiences, libtards do.
/r/MensRights01/12/23 06:11 PM
12

"Heart" was straight up bad ass and plenty female and feminine, and hotter than hot. Schwing! No feminist bullshit. Now the navel gazing identity nonsense from the Left ruins everything.
/r/MensRights01/12/23 05:23 PM
1

Although cases occur in men in their 40s and 50s, that’s not old.
/r/MensRights27/10/23 10:54 AM
1

Of course. But that doesn’t change any feminist narratives that “men’s rights activists” want changed. If you say to a feminist “yes but men do the heavy lifting and defend hearth and home from aggressors”, they don’t care.
/r/MensRights25/10/23 02:57 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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