TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

_circumscientist Archive

View 0 posts and 13 comments by _circumscientist on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I would have to disagree here though. The contrasts between the women's rights movement in western nations and battling an HIV epidemic in South - Eastern Africa are quite drastic. This also revolves around women encouraging men to undergo personally elected voluntary circumcision, so it doesn't necessarily concern bodily autonomy. From another perspective one could argue that the potential outcomes outweigh any downsides and they result in a net positive for male health outcomes in this particu…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates16/09/22 01:52 AM
1

The vast majority of males are born with a foreskin which is the primary risk factor in a variety of chronic, inflammatory, infectious, & fatal diseases. While newborn circumcision may not be the only treatment or prevention for some of these conditions, it is the most efficacious prophylactic measure one could be gifted.
/r/MensRights09/09/22 02:57 PM
-2

The distinction between life saving - preventative medicine (beneficence) and the sexual assault of a minor (harm) is NOT arbitrary.
/r/MensRights09/09/22 01:53 PM
-1

This is a conflated question that doesn't align with what either you or I wrote earlier. From the moment a baby is born unnecessarily touching their genitals (contextually) will most likely constitute sexual assault, while " severing their prepuce " would not.
/r/MensRights09/09/22 03:35 AM
-1

Of course they wouldn't, they are literally nonconsenting! They are old enough to make that decision for themselves (albeit it is more difficult with many more hurdles to overcome). Unnecessarily touching a 30 year old's genitalia would probably constitute sexual assault and severing their prepuce, in this crude scenario, may be considered aggravated assault. Additionally, completing a surgical procedure without informed consent (or obtained consent) is almost always illegal in the majority of c…
/r/MensRights08/09/22 09:14 PM
-2

Yes, you're correct. I completely agree that the data I've presented is incredibly biased in favor of circumcision. I don't intend on providing " unbiased " sources, I seek to provide medically accurate information. If the medical literature just happens to be very biased in favor of circumcision as a prophylaxis and as a treatment, so be it. Imagine if an antivaxxer came up to you and said " show me unbiased research proving vaccinations are both effective and efficacious; " you would probably …
/r/MensRights07/09/22 04:22 PM
2

I've read varying theories in the medical literature, but it is often told as a story of American influence combined with South Korean doctors enthusiastic spirits. In South Korea they see being circumcised as making themselves " superior " to the Japanese, Chinese, and " barbaric " Northerners, due to the procedures list of demonstrated prophylactic benefits. It plays into the whole belief system that they are better than other East Asians (intra - racial racism), which is why they love to expo…
/r/MensRights05/09/22 04:12 AM
-1

You're still incorrect, because all newborn circumcisions involve informed consent. There is a very good reason why circumcision advocacy dominates the medical literature. You're more likely to be literally mutilated if you are an uncircumcised male. Your misconception comes from the fact that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what informed consent is, and this acts as a false premise.
/r/MensRights04/09/22 10:08 PM
-5

a) the man's choice *Three times as many uncircumcised men wish they circumcised then uncircumcised (vice versa) in the US. b) be governed by informed consent? Newborn circumcision IS governed by informed consent.
/r/MensRights04/09/22 10:02 PM
-6

You are absolutely justified in your positivity regarding being circumcised. In fact, three times as many men wish they were circumcised then uncircumcised (~29% VS ~10%) in the US. It is an incredibly beneficial procedure that avoids numerous severe adverse consequences of foreskin retention. I mean, who wouldn't be glad about it ?!
/r/MensRights04/09/22 08:53 PM
-4

The reason no reputable organization uses the term " mutilation " to refer to circumcision is because it doesn't fit the legitimate definition.
/r/MensRights04/09/22 08:50 PM
-5

Its not healthy You sure about that?!
/r/MensRights04/09/22 08:46 PM
4

And South Koreans, at an even higher rate than Americans!
/r/MensRights04/09/22 08:42 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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