TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

widgetas Archive

View 0 posts and 9 comments by widgetas 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)
5

That would only be before the foreskin is retractable. In infants, before the glans and foreskin separate, rolling down the foreskin can cause damage. Over time it eventually becomes retractable.
/r/MensRights28/12/11 10:25 PM
8

I've been thinking about this recently. It is often claimed that parents have "the right" to circumcise their child. As their child is their legal responsibility, surely they have this 'right' up until their child reaches adulthood or similar? It would make sense that parents would be legally allowed to do this to their child a week before they're 18 just as much as they could a week after they are born. However, having spoken briefly to a medical doctor, apparently: More tricky later on as you …
/r/MensRights28/12/11 10:21 PM
1

'Experts'? Oh yes, of course they all agree with your point of view. By the by, did you know that we can find 'experts' who don't think female circumcision is all that bad? Fancy that! Who'd have thought it! Again I'll simply reference the majority of the rest of the world who say "Wtf?" at you and yours. Feel free to justify it to yourself all you want. The fact remains that you're advocating cutting off healthy portions of tissue from infants' genitalia for no good reason what so ever. And I h…
/r/MensRights25/12/11 01:13 AM
1

Strange how you figure that, seeing as it seems the majority of US males have had part of their penis removed. However, it does give an indication as to your motivation behind being in favour of circumcision. Mind you, it's not that difficult work out why most men, who have gone through the procedure, are often quite stalwart in their position. If you haven't already, you really need to understand that this issue isn't about you and your genitals. It's about all the baby boys that will be subjec…
/r/MensRights24/12/11 06:22 AM
2

With no external input whatsoever. Which would mean they don't circumcise their son because they'll have never heard of it in the first place! Or - a caring family member could ensure they consider the potential pain and harm they might do to their newborn by giving them a perspective they might not have considered before.
/r/MensRights24/12/11 04:07 AM
3

How to spot an American in one easy step: Militant opposition to circumcision is a position that's in the minority.
/r/MensRights24/12/11 04:04 AM
2

If you/they are referring to the show I think you are, then yes. Though I particularly enjoy being shown how shallow some people are. "Anthea, you turned out your 'Yes' light as soon as you saw Dave. Why?" "I don't like the colour of his trousers." It's entertainment, I suppose.
/r/MensRights26/08/11 12:23 PM
1

Second, female circumcision is a removal of a significant part of a woman's sexual pleasure center. removal of the clit is a very dramatic change in sensation for a woman. Not all female circumcision is removal of clitoris, sewing up of vagina etc. There are a number of different types, the same as there are a number of different types of male circumcision. Also - your explanation of sexual pleasure is pretty much wrong, I'm afraid, though you're arguing from the point of clitoris removal, I thi…
/r/MensRights06/07/11 06:17 PM
2

Also it completely fails to consider the fact that babies do not have sex. Young and older men have sex - why not wait until a man is old enough to decide?
/r/MensRights06/07/11 06:01 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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