I consider myself a feminist. Most of these things I have read are from r/askfeminists 2 or more years ago. It has been painful to read anything about male circumcision on that sub after that.

Answers on that sub treat MGM not as human rights violation, but as a small inconvenience. They treat MGM as far worse than FGM. So much worse that it cannot be compared.

Even if amputation of clitoral hood is worse than amputation of foreskin, mildest form of FGM is pricking genitals with needles. As far as I know, this has no permanent physical effects. It is so mild that some doctors in western countries are advocating it to stop parents from going to foreign countries to mutilate their children. Note:I am against pin prick and consider it to be violation of human rights.

One person on that sub told amputating foreskin is bad though not a mutilation but a cosmetic surgery. There was one answer that said tattoos without consent are worse because tattoos effect job prospects while circumcision doesn't.

I found more articles from feminists why intactivist tactics are bad than why MGM is bad.

Feminists use the term 'Oppression Olympics' to criticise when different groups claim to be more oppressed than each other. They say "don't compare oppression". But that is never said to people who compare MGM to FGM.

Feminists don't have to leave their work and protest or even donate a penny, but they don't even acknowledge violation of my rights. They are the feminists who value people's individual rights and autonomy. So why don't they value mine? Is it just because I am a man and not supposed to be oppressed?

Thinking about circumcision gives me grief, so I might not answer or even read responses.