TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

dirtyMAF Archive

View 1 post and 78 comments by dirtyMAF 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)
26

IntactivismdirtyMAF/r/MensRights29/11/17 03:42 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
7

Perfectly stated, but realize that the majority of the public does not understand this at all and think it's just a bunch of doctors working for the best patient care. On the one hand I can't fault people for blindly trusting anything a doctor says because medicine seems like this really complicated science that the average person can't follow, and in many areas that's true. On the other I wish they would understand that doctors are just people, some of them are corrupt and some of them suck at …
/r/MensRights03/05/22 08:33 PM
2

So, you think it's ok to force a child to be mutilated because he's old enough to understand that's what's going to happen to him? Absolutely disgusting!
/r/MensRights15/05/21 04:38 PM
4

Sounds like he has a severely fragile ego to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/20 02:20 PM
1

I just answered these questions in my previous comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 07:37 PM
1

I don't need to waste my time with your empty analogies and endless comments once I've made my point. They do not have enough value to merit a response. You are simply addicted to coming up with counter statements to anything and everything people reply to you. By the end of it whatever your original argument was has no meaning anymore. Being the last to respond doesn't make your case any stronger, if anything it's the opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/20 07:03 PM
2

I argue with topics, not with sentences. Keep on master-debating though.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 03:27 PM
2

K. No.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 12:47 PM
1

I already addressed that and you're arguing in circles.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 03:48 AM
1

An unbelievablely wordy way to say that you think keeping one's word and remaining married is more important than leaving the marriage for sanity / happiness. I disagree.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/20 03:33 AM
2

But the choice or whatever the content cannot force misery on you. It's still a choice. To be happy instead of miserable despite having to compromise. ​ I don't see that feeling miserable due to being in a certain situation is a choice. It's a result of a choice. This statement is out of context of the conversation and really doesn't make sense in any logical way. So one will not get what they wanted. Why should that make them miserable? And why not discuss children before marriage Again, there …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/20 02:01 AM
1

Will not. One or both parties REFUSE to compromise. Why would they be miserable. That's a choice. These two statements are in conflict. If you make a compromise that makes you miserable, yeah that's a choice. It's a bad choice as an alternative to divorce. For example, if one person genuinely decides they want kids and the other doesn't, there really is no compromise that's going to end in a happy outcome for both. Ignoring the strawman bit, they should stay together because they agreed to and m…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/20 08:36 PM
1

Using your logic, this means that if people change over time in such a way that the marriage is no longer compatible with their needs / views and they cannot find a compromise they should just stay together even if they are miserable? Why? Who does that help? Saying too bad, find a compromise doesn't assumes there is a compromise to be found when none may exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/20 06:58 PM
11

So, you think someone that has been traumatized by it or is suffering from long term consequences as a result of it is going to be discussing it openly?
/r/MensRights13/07/19 08:47 PM
2

Go take a trip to Europe and ask any doctor there what they think of circumcision and you'll get a very different answer. Medicine here is a business first and that embeds itself into the institution. There are doctors here that have stated this in certain terms during interviews about the beginnings of prescription opioids.
/r/MensRights14/09/18 04:47 PM
1

Hey genius, there is this thing we are using called the internet. Regardless of whether you are gay, why don't you go over to r/cock and take a look at the difference between normal and mutilated. There's plenty of scarred dried out penis there that more than confirms what I just said. Or, live in denial if you'd rather.
/r/MensRights08/07/18 04:58 AM
12

Do you, or have you ever had a foreskin? Do you have any basis for being so certain that its better to have a reduced penis?
/r/MensRights07/07/18 07:28 PM
8

Oh yes, I will never know what its like to have part of my dick removed and replaced by an ugly scar and a dried out, desensitized penis head and then try to have sex with that. I'm at such a disadvantage.
/r/MensRights07/07/18 06:27 PM
18

If you were able to suddenly have your foreskin back for a month or so, it would probably be easier for you to get that something that was functional, pleasurable and protective was taken away from you without medical need and that such an action is unethical.
/r/MensRights07/07/18 06:18 PM
4

How is it possible for you to argue so much, yet be so bad at it?
/r/MensRights27/06/18 02:10 PM
9

The simple fact that you seem to keep missing (either intentionally or not) is that most of the men on here do not think that any parent should ever have the right to cut on their babies' genitals for any reason other than a medical necessity by a doctor. If you think that's an acceptable right for parents to have, then I'm not sure why you're here.
/r/MensRights26/06/18 11:46 PM
13

This is just a terrible argument. The parents rights don't exceed the child's right to bodily autonomy in order to satisfy a rite of passage required by their religion. You can't even argue that it's harmless, it has long lasting impacts on sexual function.
/r/MensRights26/06/18 11:07 PM
2

Ok.
/r/MensRights28/03/18 03:16 PM
3

No one is this obtuse. Good luck.
/r/MensRights28/03/18 03:06 AM
1

Did you read what I wrote or the article that I linked? Arguing just to argue?
/r/MensRights28/03/18 02:38 AM
1

Lol, maybe you'll read what I wrote and figure it out.
/r/MensRights28/03/18 02:01 AM
2

There is a difference. The difference is that the foreskin is a sexually sensitive part of the body. How do I know that's true? I have one. So, you are making making the argument that it's ok to take that away from a man for highly dubious benefits, none of which hold up to statistics, unlike vaccines. The US is the only country left in the western world that "routinely" circumcises and I use that term loosely because the rate is now below 50% and only 1/3 of millenials think it's acceptable. In…
/r/MensRights28/03/18 01:05 AM
6

Zero downside, ha. At first I thought you were a troll, but now I think you might actually believe that. But hey, maybe a dried out, desensitized penis with diminished feeling and function and an ugly scar is somehow superior to a normal penis.
/r/MensRights27/03/18 02:59 AM
6

Cutting part of your son's genitals off, potentially causing long term harm to his sex life because you think some women prefer it that way is a failed justification. You think your son will be so desperate that he can only get ignorant and shallow women? How can any sane man rationalize that?
/r/MensRights27/03/18 01:20 AM
5

The number of newborn boys circumcised in the US is already in the minority. Why exactly is it a weird opinion to think that its wrong to cut off a healthy functional part of the penis for highly dubious reasons, leaving it with an ugly scar and a dried out desensitized head?
/r/MensRights19/03/18 04:25 AM
15

What's weirder, a penis with nerves cut off, reduced feeling and function and an ugly scar or a normal, intact penis? I'm going to go with the one 80% of the world's men currently have.
/r/MensRights25/02/18 03:54 AM
14

You don't miss it because you never had the chance to make a basis for comparison. It's more like 15 sq. in of skin removed and is a lot more than just a flap of skin. Circumcision reduces feeling and function. Your son should be able to make his own choice of which parts of his body he gets to keep. Before making such an irreversable decision for your son, you should learn more about what it is you'll be doing those so called medical benefits are negligable at best, something even doctors are n…
/r/MensRights06/02/18 05:00 AM
19

So 80% of the world's parents somehow manage to make it through the excrutiating task of teaching their sons to wash themselves, but you need to cut functional parts off of your son's genitals because you can't be bothered with that? Why are you even on a men's rights forum when you can't even respect your own son's bodily rights?
/r/MensRights06/02/18 03:23 AM
19

Religious freedom ends when it starts trampling on the bodily autonomy of people. That fact that they have been doing it a long time doesn't magically make it ethical.
/r/MensRights02/02/18 02:51 PM
4

Up until very recently most of the medical community behaved as if circumcision was some kind of vaccine for "hygiene." This is exactly how they sold it to parents.
/r/MensRights05/12/17 06:30 PM
9

Only American doctors, who embarrasingly seem to know very little about intact male anatomy. Go just about anywhere else and you'll get a different answer.
/r/MensRights05/12/17 05:09 PM
3

I doubt that, because these days if any parent says they are going to circumcise their kid there's a good chance someone in their social circle os going to criticise them for it. Things are changing faster than you think.
/r/MensRights02/11/17 12:22 PM
4

This would be far more effective than a ban. But no law would be explicitly passed alowing this for a long time. The only path would be lawsuits that succeed and set a legal precident.
/r/MensRights30/09/17 01:50 PM
12

Just because something is a religious right doesn't automatically make it acceptable. Think about it, you are using religion to justify cutting off part of a baby's genitals, an action which can and does have a variety of long term consequences. Your freedom of religion should not include freedom to cut body parts off of those who cannot consent. It's not anti-semetic to call that an ethics violation.
/r/MensRights28/09/17 06:24 PM
11

Yeah, I'm pretty sure they didn't. I'm intact and the first intact man my gf has been with. She told me she had insisted on circumcising her son for hygiene reasons. I explained to her that there are no hygiene benefits and that it's basically a human rights violation. I gave her a good article on it from Morten Frisch (sp) and she felt pretty bad. She realized the consent issue on her own after that. It's still been fairly recent that the world's knowledge is at our fingertips. It's pretty clea…
/r/MensRights08/09/17 12:49 AM
13

Agreed. So many naive parents are easily convinced by anyone in a white coat that utters the word "hygiene."
/r/MensRights08/09/17 12:18 AM
2

You really have no idea what you're talking about. Why not cut off and seal one ear at birth? It will reduce ear infections by 50% and if done as a baby they don't know what they're missing right? If I got circumcised tomorrow, it would ruin sex for me. You really think its worth damaging the genitals to have better odds when rolling the dice on catching stds by not using a condom? The excuses for this sick practice need to stop.
/r/MensRights01/09/17 02:11 AM
2

And now you know there was nothing wrong with it, only that you and your friends were missing part of yours.
/r/MensRights26/07/17 12:40 PM
10

Tell her that you know intact men that are very happy to have been left that way. I'm one. You are a major decider in this and since you don't want it done it can't happen. Plenty of people on here have given excellent reasons for not circumcising. She needs to hear those in a calm manner. After that if she were still insistent, if I were in that situation that would be someone I would not want to be with anymore and would find a legal course to prevent the circumcision followed by divorce.
/r/MensRights25/07/17 01:25 AM
10

It seems that you completely miss point. It's not about you, it's about protecting the bodily autonomy of newborns. Its great that you're happy how you are, but what if you weren't. There's plenty of men, some right on this thread that are not happy at all. Also, it's not excess skin, that's just an ignorant statement. And if you could be intact for a week, you might have a different attitude about circumcision being ok.
/r/MensRights03/06/17 02:14 PM
9

New data needs to be collected on circumcisions rates. There are some indications that it's less than 50 % now. The generation growing up now will be far more ammenable to ending RIC and I think at that time it will be a more mainstream conversation. Probably another 10-15 yrs. for it to fall out of favor to the point where any parent who does it is criticized for it. Making it illegal will be challenging because of the religious backlash though.
/r/MensRights12/05/17 03:22 PM
10

There's a big difference between justification and explanation. I'm strongly against it and online access has clearly begun to inform the next generation. My gf circumcised her son. I'm intact and explained how its wrong to her, and now that shes with me she knows the hygiene arguments are BS and better understands the ethical implications. She knows better now, even though its too late. There are a lot of parents out there just like her.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 01:03 AM
3

Not sure why you are being down voted because this gets right to the core of the issue: changing the culture and getting people to think differently.
/r/MensRights30/03/17 12:49 AM
18

Here's the problem though: parents often trust (naively) their doctor. When the doctor tells them it's more hygenic they believe that. They also hear the same thing from most of their family and grew up in a culture of cutting. So they don't bother to question it and do their own research. They end up thinking of it like a vaccination because so many ignorant doctors think the same thing. Now, you and I know better and so we have to speak up in whatever way possible to new parents so that they m…
/r/MensRights30/03/17 12:46 AM
3

Does anyone know if there is more recent data on the circumcision rates?
/r/MensRights30/03/17 12:27 AM
1

Again, you can't compare your functionality against something you've never had. A lot of these statements by the mayo clinic have been debunked. As someone who is intact I know what I would lose and it would be a significant impact. The US is the only country left in the western world which still finds circumcision acceptable. Virtually every other medical association has come out against it. Germany tried to ban it in 2012 and the medical community in Denmark has released a unanimous statement …
/r/MensRights25/03/17 02:23 PM
3

So, as long as you can finish, that's all that matters? Do you think that diminished feeling you have during sex will help you out as you grow older? How does sex compare to when you had a foreskin? Oh, you can't because you never had the chance. Its great that you are happy with how things are, especially since you cant change it, but it's wrong to do this to babies for no medical reason and needs to stop.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 10:50 PM
3

If you think its a good idea to have the functionality of your manhood diminished because some of the women you happen to live near think it looks better, then I feel bad for you.
/r/MensRights24/03/17 09:35 PM
1

If they come back for complications as a result of getting circumcised, why would you not consider that a botch? Is it only a botch to you if they make a mistake that causes more harm than a typical circumcision? What if those comlications require additional surgury, which will result in additional scar tissue, which will further reduce penile sensitivity. Sheesh.
/r/MensRights15/03/17 11:22 PM
3

So you are ok with cosmetic genital surgury on infants which has a mortality rate greater than 0, not to mention meteal stenosis and all of the botched jobs, which were studied at Mass General where they found a botch rate of 7.4% https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3253617 Got it. If you're willing to ignore the rest of what the medical community throughout the world says, this study, the reported infant deaths, the large numbers of men who have stated they are unhappy it was done to t…
/r/MensRights14/03/17 07:19 PM
3

A baby dying from an uneccessary, harmful procedure is a datapoint, not an anecdote. Of course a baby cannot give consent, which is why non-medically indicated circumcision should not be performed until that baby grows up to make their own informed decision. Try looking outside your bubble and thinking critically, the rest of the western world and their medical communities disapporove of RIC and the US stance on it. Not just a few, virtually all of them. You are right though, arrogant doctors do…
/r/MensRights14/03/17 05:36 PM
3

Uh, yes obviously... And it looks like you missed my point that it's not ok to remove healthy, functional tissue from someone. Whoosh. Babies cannot give consent. That is why we have legal guardianship. If this were the case, we would need consent to give antiobiotics, seizure meds, perform non emergent surgeries. The fact that you bring this up as an issue only tells me you are ignorant. All of the examples you just gave demonstrate medical need. Circumcision does not. Additionally, circumcisio…
/r/MensRights14/03/17 01:25 PM
1

It is important to remember that parents are told by doctors that its more hygenic and it causes them to view it as something akin to vaccination, as crazy as that may seem. That's changing now, more parents are doing their own research and more doctors are saying that its only for cosmetic appearance.
/r/MensRights14/03/17 01:57 AM
3

Wow. This is why so many people distrust American doctors. I have so many questions, doctor. Is the foreskin functional healthy tissue prior to removal? Was it removed with the baby's consent? Do you feel that it's acceptable to perform cosmetic genital surgury on an infant? Are you ok with the fact that an estimated 100 baby boys die each year in the US as result of their circumcisions? Also I'm curious to how you would compare sex being circumcised vs. when you were intact, since you've said y…
/r/MensRights14/03/17 01:18 AM
1

Something you need to consider is that that attitudes towards circumcision are changing significantly and the rates have fallen. Its now 50 % or less. In some regions its less than 30 % now. Your son would likely be in the minority. I am an intact and grateful for it. If any woman ever rejected me for it (none have) I would be glad that I learned early on how shallow she is and move on.
/r/MensRights05/03/17 01:42 PM
2

Your caps lock has no impact. You cannot compare impoverished areas of the world with the first world. You are completely dismisssive of the sexual loss that occurs as a result of circumcision. Go ask some of those best doctors in the world the functions of the foreskin and see whether they are able to answer. Even if there are any medical benefits to circumcision (questionable at best and yes I looked at your link) infants dont have sex and the boy can decide for himself when he is older. Would…
/r/MensRights22/02/17 04:09 PM
1

Wow, who is ignorant here? Circumcision is unethical because it permanently alters the penis and has a negative impact on sex and sexual pleasure. I have first hand experience and I know this is true. Even the AAP has admitted that when they are talking about benefits vs. risks they are talking about the complications from surgury only and not the long term effects. Why? Because they have done no study on the long term effects. If you talk to just about any doctor outside the US they will tell y…
/r/MensRights22/02/17 01:53 PM
3

If your pinkies were cut off at birth you would be "just fine" without them. You never had them and so never missed them because you never knew anything else and adapted to function with 4 fingers. I'm intact and and it has a significant impact on what I feel during sex. You can choose not to believe that, but orgasm has always been part of sex for me, not the goal of it. Because of what I feel, I know just how unethical it is for this practice to be allowed to continue.
/r/MensRights10/02/17 11:49 PM
11

Authored by Brian Morris.
/r/MensRights08/02/17 03:52 PM
13

Thanks for writing this. Im intact and it made me so sad when I found out my GF's son was circumcised. She insisted on it because she thought it was more hygenic. Of course she thought she was doing the right thing, the effects on sex were negligible and was totally ignorant of what an issue this was until she met me. Doctors are in total denial about it and not enough of them are willing to accept that they are causing harm. If you ever have any friends excpecting sons please consider sending t…
/r/MensRights31/01/17 08:04 PM
8

I'm glad to hear this is happening. Hopefully, doctors will also start waking up to the ethical issues here.
/r/MensRights21/01/17 04:32 AM
3

Such a foolish notion. I'm intact and I can climax when I want to. I would never want to lose the sensations from my foreskin. As far as I know, Europe doesnt have higher incidence of premature ejaculation and everyone there is intact. You simply don't know what you're missing.
/r/TheRedPill31/12/16 09:11 PM
9

So, cutting baby penises up should not be criticized because it is a major part of faith? That makes one anti-Semitic? Look man, I have Jewish friends and I'm a small percentage Jewish myself, and circumcision in the name of religion is just plain sickening. Try to rationalize all you like, but religion never gets to supercede basic human rights.
/r/MensRights27/11/16 02:44 PM
3

This. As little as a decade ago parents would circumcise because they were brought up to believe thats just what should be done. But, today its highly likely that new parents at least know theres a movement against it. It takes time for a culture shift to reach critical mass, but it is happening.
/r/MensRights02/11/16 01:31 AM
3

Don't bother this guy is either a troll or mentally deficient with no understanding of human rights.
/r/MensRights22/10/16 01:26 AM
1

Much lower than that actually. I think you are referring to the total population thats circumcised. In 2010 the newborn circumcision rate was around 50 %. Awareness on the issue has been expanding and that's hopefully reduced it further.
/r/MensRights18/10/16 01:13 AM
3

Probably within another generation or so. I think attitudes really are changing. Even most parents who choose to circumcise know by now that many people are against it.
/r/MensRights30/09/16 07:21 PM
9

The majority of doctors do not favor circumcision, only a portion of US doctors do and that number is shrinking. Im wondering why you are so angry and have such a strong opinion about it being a good thing? You never experienced having a foreskin so how can you be such a big advocate for cutting it off? Why dont you take a trip to Europe and ask some random sample over there about all the problems theyve had with their foreskin. Why dont you look up the std rates over there and compare with the …
/r/MensRights28/08/16 12:22 PM
1

Good idea, why don't you look up any western medical organization outside of the U.S. and find out what their official stance is on the issue.
/r/MensRights05/07/16 06:11 PM
10

The intent of braces is to correct misaligned teeth growing improperly which often cause tooth and jaw problems. Nothing is removed, and no function or sensation is lost as a result. It is also helping the teeth fit the way they are supposed to fit. No doubt, you are going to say no function or sensation is lost from circumcision or that it improves function because of your personal religious bias, but you would be wrong. Although there is substantial evidence to support that, I don't need to re…
/r/MensRights05/07/16 05:54 PM
7

You clearly have no idea what consent means at all. You cannot justify any body modification on an infant/minor for any reason other than an explicit medical need. To do otherwise is completely unethical. Period.
/r/MensRights05/07/16 04:19 PM
2

You are right about the dad, he is a piece of shit. Their relationship was over at the time of birth and he was most likely arguing just to argue. As for the ignorance issue you cant ignore the fact that circumcision is institutionalized in some societies. My girlfriend moved from a place where it was common to the US, where it was common up until recently. That means every boy she grew up with was circumcised, had a family telling her it was a good idea to do it then moved here where some idiot…
/r/MensRights16/03/16 12:48 PM
2

I just read your post and wanted to tell you my thoughts on responsibility. Im not circumcised and im very much against it. Im dating someone who has a son and she was the one who insisted on it. This shocked me initially because he was born in 2011 when plenty of online info. was available. Plus the dad was against it but not strongly enough to put up a fight. But i realized that the power of someone wearing a white coat in a hospital. Many people blindly trust doctors and pediatricians. Many o…
/r/MensRights15/03/16 11:24 PM
2

Im not circumcised either and i completely agree with you. This whole issue of circumcision recently hit me hard for a different reason than others. Im dating someone who has a son and i found that he was circumcised and she was the one who insisted on it not her ex. Why? Hygiene reasons. She comes from a culture where its common and moved to america where its common up until recently. Obviously some idiot doctor reccomended it and she trusted him. And kills me to know it was done to her son. Th…
/r/MensRights17/02/16 06:14 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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