~ archived since 2018 ~

Circumcised at 18

kanuk876

August 19, 2010

0 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAHGFx95D80

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Circumcised at 18
Author	kanuk876
Upvotes	0
Comments	3
Date	August 19, 2010 4:54 AM UTC (15 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/d2vpk/circumcised_at_18/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/circumcised-at-18.1047991 https://theredarchive.com/post/1047991

Comments

[–]kanuk876[S,🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 16 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Andoo -1 points0 points1 point 16 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]kanuk876[S,🍰] 0 points1 point2 points 16 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Or maybe the ones you didn't mention:

Like this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sexual_effects_of_circumcision Including a nice graph and comments like this:

There are at least 5 places reasons this article is POV. Jakew (who wrote and owns the article) specifically makes the article is POV pro-circ propaganda because he recently:

Refused to permit an introduction laying out the pro and con points (reasons circs can help sexuality or hurt sexuality) of view and research.

Maintains the current intro, which is neither sourced nor accurate.

Refuses to make the table understandable and relevant. For example, he places emphasis on studies that were not statistically relevant. A couple studies are misrepresented and/or buried.

Refuses to permit a balanced organized (by reason) summary of the studies. For example elective circ's should be considered separately from medical circs. Likewise, studies of circs on neonates should be separate from circs on adults for medical reasons. Finally, subjective and objective studies should be considered separately.

Refuses to permit the Sorrell's graph, though it's worthy.

Or maybe some studies you find less comfortable:

http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/

http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/