~ archived since 2018 ~

Feminist bigot justifies genital mutilation of infant boys in the name of god and her sexual preference!

AntiBigots

October 28, 2011

21 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://www.reddit.com/r/BigotryShowcase/comments/lqu0c/newborn_male_circumcision_debate_atheist_mra_vs/

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Feminist bigot justifies genital mutilation of infant boys in the name of god and her sexual preference!
Author	AntiBigots
Upvotes	21
Comments	27
Date	October 28, 2011 1:51 AM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/lrp98/feminist_bigot_justifies_genital_mutilation_of/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/feminist-bigot-justifies-genital-mutilation-of.1032489 https://theredarchive.com/post/1032489

Comments

[–]loony636 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]loony636 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

Of course. But that's not what I said.

If she's saying that all male children should be circumcised at birth because she thinks that's better, then that's bad. But if she's just saying that she prefers circumcised penises, which I believe was the OP's outrage, then I don't understand the difference between what I said that her comments.

But you included a reply, let's look at that. By the extension of your argument, you should never, in a public setting, make any comment about how cool tattoos look. That only puts pressure on men and women to get tattoos, and to encourage their children to get tattoos.

Let me be clear: If men are circumcised at birth, necessarily without their consent, then that's wrong. But why can't women say "I think uncircumcised penises look weird", just as some men can say "I think those breasts look a bit big". Sorry, but they're preferences, no one gets necessarily forced into anything. If you want to get desired by those particular women, then go circumcise yourself. But I haven't yet met a single man who, as a result of comments from a woman or women generally, felt pressured into getting themselves or their children circumcised.

If women (or even men) are circumcising their male offspring at birth without their consent, then that's bad. But why can't you express a preference for something that isn't necessarily illegal? I just don't buy the "it pressures men" argument; if you want to be desired by women, why shouldn't you have the option to change? I mean, some women only like buff men, and men then hit the gym to win their affection. If some men want to mutilate themselves to fit in with what these women want, then why can't they do that?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]loony636 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

You can't compare circumcision to tattoos. Compare circumcision to circumcision.

Why not? I originally said clitoral piercing; that's a process that destroys substantial quantities of the clitoris. Why isn't this the same? Why isn't breast augmentation? Or face lifts? Or liposuction?

Imagine a man said he prefers circumcised/ genitally mutilated females. It will surely receive all kinds of outrage from the public.

Female Genital Mutilation and circumcision aren't really comparable, though. FGM involves literally brutalising the vagina beyond the point where it can experience any kind of sexual pleasure. Men with circumcised penises can still enjoy sex, even as much as uncircumcised people.

But if we must, I'd say that any man who came out and said that he preferred FGM'd vaginas would probably be criticised because those people are typically the same people who perform FGM on their daughters/wives/women in general. But assuming he wasn't, he'd be shot down for exactly the same reasons male circumcision should be; because women should be allowed to choose, etc.

Your contention was that commenting on how good circumcised penises looked made men more likely to circumcise their sons. Not only do I think that argument is stupid, it would apply even less to women in that situation.

So he should be allowed to come out and say how much he loves FGM. Because he'll be labelled as an idiot, and the reasons as to why FGM shouldn't be done to children will be reinforced. And if any women have a particular desire to be with him, then they can take a hacksaw to their vagina just like any other woman could.

Sure. Adults can do whatever they want with their body. Just leave infant boys alone.

And I agree.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

Why not?

Circumcision involves removal of a body part.

Female Genital Mutilation and circumcision aren't really comparable

Keep playing oppression olympics. MGM does not have to be comparable to FGM to be considered mutilation. Male suffering does not have to be equal to female suffering to be considered suffering.

Your contention was that commenting on how good circumcised penises looked made men more likely to circumcise their sons.

Most circumcisions are done as it has become a tradition - like father. like son.

FGM involves literally brutalising the vagina beyond the point where it can experience any kind of sexual pleasure.

Are you sure? Research suggests contrary.

Women who underwent FGM had a higher sexual response & more frequent orgasm than the control group:

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/cagca/women_who_underwent_fgm_had_a_higher_sexual/

The findings of this study indicate that sexual desire, pleasure, and orgasm are experienced by the majority of women who have been subjected to this extreme sexual mutilation:

http://www.fgmnetwork.org/authors/Lightfoot-klein/sexualexperience.htm

[–]loony636 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Circumcision involves removal of a body part.

Okay, clitoral piercings then. They remove a substantial amount of the clitoris and clitoral hood. Or labiaplastys.

Keep playing oppression olympics. MGM does not have to be comparable to FGM to be considered mutilation. Male suffering does not have to be equal to female suffering to be considered suffering.

Fine? That's not what I said. I fact, I said the exact opposite; both FGM and MGM are bad. My point was that neither should be enforced on children at birth, but both should be allowed to be commented on.

Most circumcisions are done as it has become a tradition - like father. like son.

Fine, but that's not your argument. Your argument was that in women saying that uncircumcised penises are more attractive, that places pressure on men. So long as those men aren't circumcising their sons at birth, why is it not okay for women to express that preference, so that men are giving the opportunity to follow it if they want?

Are you sure? Research suggests contrary.

To quote your own studies:

The struggling child is simply held immobile throughout the operation, and it is obvious that under such conditions the likelihood of hemorrhage, infection, trauma to adjacent structures, shock from pain, urinary retention due to sepsis, edema or scarring, and psychic trauma is extremely high.

The infibulation, even among girls who are circumcised by trained midwives or nurses in a clinic-like setting, under only slightly more antiseptic conditions with a locally injected analgesis to mitigate the pain, presents tremendous health problems to the girl later on in life, if she survives the initial trauma of the operation. Various degrees and types of urinary obstruction are a frequent result of infibulation, and concomitant urinary tract infections are very common in pharaonically circumcised women.

The onset of menstruation generally creates a tremendous problem for the girl as the vaginal aperture is inadequate for menstrual flow, and an infibulated virgin suffers protracted and painful periods of menstruation, with a great deal of blockage, retention and buildup of clots behind the infibulation. Adolescence is not a happy time for the Sudanese girl, and depression is said by doctors to be common at this time. Girls are often married soon after menstruation commences.

Clearly, the Sudanese bride undergoes conditions of tremendous pain, as well as physical and psychic trauma.

In talking about this part of their marital lives, women often said that their penetration was terrible, agonizingly painful, and frequently resulted in hemorrhage or prolonged infection

Other women said that their orgasms were weak or difficult to achieve. Frequently, intractible pain, a residual of the circumcision, prevented orgasm altogether. Sometimes, anorgasmia was the probable result of an unhappy marriage. Among the anorgasmic women, some were educated upper-class women who had become aware of orgasmic uncircumcised women in other parts of the world. They were full of rage at what had been done to them. They said that, although they loved their husbands as human beings, they could feel no sexual desire for them or any other men.

Sure, they may not be made totally sexually impotent, but the issues they face are far beyond what men face as a result of circumcision.

[–]rantgrrl 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]loony636 -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]rantgrrl 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Okay, clitoral piercings then. They remove a substantial amount of the clitoris and clitoral hood. Or labiaplastys.

amputation of the testicles (castration),

amputation of the penis (penectomy),

amputation of the foreskin (circumcision),

amputation of the clitoris (clitoridectomy)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amputation#Types

amputation of breasts (mastectomy)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastectomy

Sure, they may not be made totally sexually impotent, but the issues they face are far beyond what men face as a result of circumcision.

Hey doofus, you said the FGM victims can't experience pleasure or orgasm. I proved you wrong (Do you now feel like an idiot for claiming something you know nothing about?).

Don't dodge and change the topic to the level of damage caused by FGM. I already said that -- MGM does not have to be comparable to FGM to be considered mutilation. Male suffering does not have to be equal to female suffering to be considered suffering.

Fuck you.

PS: Read this. Applies to idiots like you.

[–]loony636 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Hey doofus, you said the FGM victims can't experience pleasure or orgasm. I proved you wrong (Do you now feel like an idiot for claiming something you know nothing about?).

I do, a bit. Clearly my preconceptions about female circumcision had been somewhat wrong (I thought they could never achieve sexual pleasure, but it seems that, at least some of the time, some of them can). I'm happy to have more facts now. But I still maintain that in 99.99% of instances, FGM is going to practically affect women more than circumcision practically affects men.

Don't dodge and change the topic to the level of damage caused by FGM. I already said that -- MGM does not have to be comparable to FGM to be considered mutilation. Male suffering does not have to be equal to female suffering to be considered suffering.

The thing you still don't seem to understand is that I agree with you. I agree that circumcision and FGM don't have to be the same to be considered suffering. I agree 100%. I agree that it shouldn't be imposed on children at all, and that if idiots want to do this to themselves, they should be allowed to, but once they're old enough to understand what they're doing so that they can consent to it properly.

I just think that FGM is a more serious violation of children's rights because the nature of the surgery, the effect on women who have it, and the likely consequences of the procedure. If you can show me the reverse is true I'd like to see it. Boys can die from being circumcised, but complications are far rarer than with FGM. That doesn't make the former okay, but it makes the latter more serious. In the same way that cancer and influenza both suck, but since the latter probably wont kill you the former is more serious.

Fuck you.

And so goes the semblance of coherent argument.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

I just think that FGM is a more serious violation of children's rights because the nature of the surgery, the effect on women who have it, and the likely consequences of the procedure.

You are repeating the same garbage like a braindead zombie parrot. I already said that Male suffering does not have to be equal to female suffering to be considered suffering. Why should female suffering be the standard by which male suffering is measured?

You are no different from a homophobe who likes lesbians because he thinks its hot and sexy but hates gay men because he thinks they are gross and disgusting.

And so goes the semblance of coherent argument.

And what is this argument all about anyway? Is your talk about an adult's choice to get circumcised actually a cover to defend cosmetic infant circumcision?

How many intact adults in their right mind would get themselves circumcised? How many intact men would have their foreskin amputated for shallow women who don't like the look of natural human genitalia and want them mutilated into a dildo?

Look at Europe. Neonatal circumcision is uncommon there. Less than 20% of men are circumcised in UK and Europe I bet that of the 20% that did get circumcised, most of them were from Jewish, Muslim and Immigrant communities who got circumcised as part of religious ritual, with a very few of those being medical circumcision.

The percentage of US men who are circumcised is an astonishingly high 80%. The good news is that recent yearly rates show a decline in practice - 56.9% in 2008 (NHDS) 56.3% in 2008 (NIS), and 54.7% in 2010 (CDM).

[–]Bobsutan 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rockidol 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]c0mputar 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Benocrates 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MisterMustache 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]abk0100 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrStinkybutt -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]hardwarequestions 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrStinkybutt 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]hardwarequestions 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MrStinkybutt 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link