~ archived since 2018 ~

Antagonism and dismissiveness toward male sexuality - a look at a thread asking if it’s cruel for someone to expect their partner to use condoms for the rest of their life.

March 31, 2021

Today I wanted to talk about this thread that came up on my front page: https://np.reddit.com/r/TooAfraidToAsk/comments/mgpumu/is_it_cruel_that_i_dont_want_to_get_on_birth/

The OP here was asking if it is cruel to not want to take hormonal birth control and expect her partner to use condoms for the rest of their life as their main birth control method. I went into it expecting people to say it’s not cruel to choose what to do with your own body, but that it’s also healthy to work with your partner and see what they need.

The top comment was pretty good and reasonable, but a lot of the thread was filled with all sorts of platitudes about how it’s completely okay and not cruel, and how horrible it is that women “are made to be more concerned about male feelings than their own health”. Anyone saying that it wasn’t cruel, but was potentially unrealistic and/or impractical to expect him to do indefinitely if they become lifelong partners, was heavily downvoted and accused of caring more about men’s penises than a woman’s body. Ergo, the accusations of misogyny and patriarchy began.

Before I go forward, I do want to leave a disclaimer. This post isn’t meant to justify the assholes who refuse to wear a condom with someone they just met, or stealthing, or anything of that nature. One should always use a condom when having sex with someone you aren’t intimately acquainted with with, and it’s very unreasonable and an asshole move to try to weasel out of condom usage with strangers/sex workers/new sexual partners.

With that out of the way, I want to share some background for why I find this topic so upsetting. I’m a non-binary male and I had my genitals mutilated at birth. I have a nasty and very uneven scar line, and I have a lot of sensitivity issues from being circumcised; being mutilated has caused significant damage to my sexuality. I was once in a relationship with a woman and we tried to use condoms as our main birth control method at first. Unfortunately, it didn’t work, and I could hardly feel a thing with a condom on. We would go on for hours with me feeling almost nothing with it - while some people would give me shitty platitudes to make me feel better (“You can last hours, dude, it’s actually a good thing!”) being unable to orgasm was horrible for both of us.

It wasn’t until she took the pill that we were able to have an actual sexual life. And the thing is... I am by no means the only person affected in this way. I moderate for r/CircumcisionGrief and r/Intactivism, and I’ve heard from many countless men/those born male about how circumcision ruined their sexual satisfaction and how sex using barrier methods is very impractical and has very little pleasure.

Alas — our society doesn’t care about the millions of men who had their genitals damaged at birth. It doesn’t care about the thousands of nerve endings we lack because of religious or cultural “tradition”. Instead, there’s a HUGE narrative that male sexuality is something to be ashamed of. That having a penis means your sexuality is dirtier, and that male sexuality is second to female sexuality.

Why is it that any man who expresses that condoms don’t work well for him and aren’t good for sex are treated like misogynists, assholes, or patriarchal? Why do we uplift female sexuality and empower women who choose what to do with their bodies, but then denigrate men who dislike condom usage, and treat them as bad people? Regarding the thread above, I think it would actually be very inconsiderate to expect your partner to only use condoms for the rest of his life and never get permission to go inside raw unless trying to attain pregnancy.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates.

/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates archive

Download the post

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

Post Information
Title Antagonism and dismissiveness toward male sexuality - a look at a thread asking if it’s cruel for someone to expect their partner to use condoms for the rest of their life.
Author 2717192619192
Upvotes 193
Comments 64
Date March 31, 2021 7:38 PM UTC (1 year ago)
Subreddit /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/antagonism-and-dismissiveness-toward-male.1061637
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/mhdwgd/antagonism_and_dismissiveness_toward_male/
Top posts by 2717192619192

[–]kookrew 69 points70 points  (18 children) | Copy Link

Isn’t completely related, but worth mentioning. I really struggle to have sex with condoms on due to a combination of light nerve damage and having foreskin, and I’m oddly wide so if I do have to wear a condom, I pretty much need my own special condoms or it isn’t going to be fun for me, and more than likely painful.

In unexpected casual encounters, if I don’t have my own on hand, and they are not okay with having unprotected sex (I get tested frequently, but I still understand the very present risks) I would generally just prefer to not have sex and remove my consent.

Yet almost every time I’ve found myself in this situation, the removal of my consent is almost always met with aggression or mockery, or worst of all, continued pressured attempts to make me wear one. This is obviously not recourse I enjoy dealing with for deciding to not have sex with someone.

I made a post on r/unpopularopinions about how removing consent in a situation such as this one is still removal of consent and should be respected, and not only was the post pretty thoroughly attacked, but I was banned from the sub without appeal, and somehow called a rapist in the process by the mods there.

It’s baffling how under different circumstances, large numbers of people truly believe that removal of sexual consent shouldn’t apply.

[–]confusedbonobo007 37 points38 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

What the fuck. I'm like confused.

How in the world is you taking back consent before anything happens wrong?

[–]kookrew 32 points33 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I think they see not wanting to wear a poorly fit condom as an invalid reason to change your mind about wanting to have sex, and therefore an invalid reason to remove consent, which is really, really messed up logic.

Then I further have to assume that the people who aggressively attacked me for holding such an opinion on Reddit see it as a way to pressure someone into having unprotected sex (I believe that’s why the mods called me a rapist), when in reality, I’m perfectly happy with walking away from the situation. My would be partners however, are the ones who are not okay with it.

I was really surprised to receive such consistent, strong backlash from it.

[–]RubberDingo 13 points14 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Perhaps it's misandry? Assuming a man is trying to force someone to have unprotected sex by withdrawing consent, rather than simply having preferences and being okay with just skipping sex entirely? And the criticisms seemed premised on a female entitlement to sex, on their terms of course, and thus refusal may be seen as a rebuffing of the power women/a woman thinks she has over men/a man due to sexual desirability? If a woman uses sex to be controlling, she will be offended when a man expresses he can happily live without sex with her.

[–]mewacketergi2left-wing male advocate 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, that's misandry alright.

[–]confusedbonobo007 10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ok yeah I mean...I understand why they say that but still.

That's the issue, isn't it. One person's boundaries/rules is another person being pressured. The world is so complicated lol...but as long as you are chill about it, I don't know it what world they are right.

Like if I say "I don't do condoms. If you are on the pill, fine. Otherwise, I will pass" - Is this stating your position and being clear about it so that an honest discussion can take place, or are you trying to pressure the other person? I guess it depends on who you ask, but I always lean the first one UNLESS there is reason to suspect otherwise...

[–]mewacketergi2left-wing male advocate 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It is mind-bending how assuming the worst is normalized in these situations, particularly with progressive-, or feminist-identifying women.

[–]Spacct 12 points13 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

From what I understand, their mindset is that women have no agency at all and any choice you make that they wouldn't like is "forcing them to do what you like". Hence you're a rapist for turning down sex you wouldn't be into. It's ridiculous, but apparently this is the thought process.

[–]confusedbonobo007 4 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Yeah...no one I know thinks like that because if they did I wouldn't know em/talk to em/be friends with them. Its actually the most backwards misogynist and misandrist way of thinking. Somehow its a 2 in 1.

[–]Spacct 4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Explain why anyone would ever have an issue with a guy noping out of sex then, or why that poster would be banned for explaining his thought process. Like the other guy above said, a man's boundaries are a woman's "being pressured".

[–]confusedbonobo007 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

What do you mean?

I'm sure there are actually real people like that. I just don't surround myself with them, or at least, if I find out they are like that, I either help them get it right or leave. Boundaries are boundaries. Fuck that.

[–]Spacct -3 points-2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You're speaking anecdotally, which means nothing to anyone but you. Your lived experience differs from what most guys experience.

[–]confusedbonobo007 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Sure. I know that. I was pretty clear that I don't knowingly associate myself with anyone that ridiculous. That's all I said. Am I not allowed to talk about my own lived experience?

[–]Kasabian56 21 points22 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It’s so sad that men are always supposed to want sex , so much so that people don’t even consider consent when it comes to us. What you did was perfectly reasonable and yet you still had so much backlash which is the complete opposite of you were a woman. Breaking the stereotype of ‘men just want sex all of the time’ is going to be tough. Honestly I don’t know that it’s going to happen without both masculine and unmasculine men being allowed to show how we really feel.

[–]RubberDingo 9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

"My partner refuses to have unprotected sex with me, due to the possibility of pregnancy. He insists he'll only have sex with a condom. But I don't want to have sex with a condom, so I decided to take sex off the table (consent)."

Would these critics of the OP find this offensive were it said by a woman?

[–]Old-Compote-9991left-wing male advocate 12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not wanting to wear a condom during sex is a perfectly legitimate reason to not want to have sex with someone who requires condom usage.

You can revoke consent for any reason.

The interesting thing is that I used to have the same issue for a while (and it took a minute to find condoms that do fit me) and I kinda thought "I'm just happy to be here" even though the sex was bad and it was painful afterward (I ended up going to the ER the third night I tried having sex bc of the pain).

I think its hard for people to see men as worthy of having some type of agency when it comes to sex.

[–]XorFish 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Regular condoms are too narrow for the average penis.

I would recommend everyone to get condoms that really are the right fit for them.

I also don't think that either a condom or the normal pill alone are save enough birth control options if you really don't want a child at the moment. The risk of a pregnancy is bigger than 10% with couples that only use either of them.

It is a shame that there are no effective reversible birth control options for men right now, even though a possible technology for it is already half a century old.

[–]JakeMWP 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Holy shit what? That's literally as ethical as you can be. How in the hell could that get any pushback, much less accusations of rape?

[–]DarthMeow504 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

somehow called a rapist

a) don't have sex with someone

b) get called a rapist

What in the fucking fuck.

[–]throwra_coolname209 16 points17 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

My opinion is honestly really simple here: it's not cruel, but it's a valid dealbreaker.

If a man has good reason to not want to use a condom (and as a restoring circumcised guy I definitely empathize with you) then his decision to not use a condom should be respected.

Likewise, if a woman doesn't want to be on varying forms of birth control, that should also be respected.

But if a couple can't come to a mutual middle ground here, then I think it's a valid reason to move on. I say that as an advocate for condoms and as someone who uses them far more often than not. They make sex tremendously difficult for me and I'm willing to deal with that, but I wouldn't marry someone who wanted me to use them for every sexual endeavor involving intercourse forever.

[–]peanutbutterjams 9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

women “are made to be more concerned about male feelings than their own health”.

I keep seeing statements like this and my only response is that they're being asked to be more concerned about another human being's feelings and desires. As if the notion of being empathetic goes out the window as soon as they find out the person is male.

[–]Suicidal_Alone 21 points22 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, my first reaction while reading your post was to say "of course it's okay to keep using a condom indefinitely rather than using birth control!" I say this for three reasons (at least one of them completely selfish) First, using a condom has never been a big deal to me. Second, I really do worry about my (past) partners' health with birth control. Thirdly, (selfishly) I find women who get on birth control have diminished libidos and it has been hard on me in the past. So yeah, just wear a condom!

Having said all that, I think you make a good point that I wasn't aware of, and I think probably most people on that thread were not aware of. I think in your case it would be fair to not want to wear a condom. There are other ways to get around it (finishing outside of intercourse?) but that's something you and your partner would need to speak about.

I'm sorry you feel that way about your circumcision, I've actually learned a lot more about it online and am now completely against it. If you want to do it, do it as an adult, end of story.

One thing that's a little related is how men like me (uncircumcised) often get told that circumcised penised are better, or "normal". Imagine if we spoke that way about women's parts! Oh well

[–]AdamChap 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why is it that any man who expresses that condoms don’t work well for him and aren’t good for sex are treated like misogynists, assholes, or patriarchal?

People assume intent. That you are lying to get what you want, pleasure, and you'll notice that's what they appear to hate the most, men getting pleasure.

Why do we uplift female sexuality and empower women who choose what to do with their bodies, but then denigrate men who dislike condom usage, and treat them as bad people?

Because women and men love female sexuality. No one loves male sexuality the same way. Men throw each other under the bus for a taste whilst women do the opposite. Female sexuality and empowerment sells.

and how horrible it is that women “are made to be more concerned about male feelings than their own health”.

Here in the UK when I was sixteen they rolled out HPV vaccines for girls. As a male I could still get HPV from oral sex and develop cancers. Even to this day giving my partner oral sex puts my health at risk. In fact there are a lot of risks associated with oral sex but the women like it so you do it right?

I guess the question is, are men not taking their OWN HEALTH as seriously as women are? (hint: we all this one)

[–]LoveTheGiraffe 18 points19 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

I'm somewhere in the middle here. The birth control pill just really has a lot of downsides attached to it, however there are countless other forms you can stop pregnancy. There should be some middle ground. If you can't feel anything with condoms on, you should check for alternatives if your partner doesn't want to take the pill.

I personally am very paranoid when it comes to pregnancy and usually go for condoms that are a little bit tighter because of that, however that makes the orgasm while wearing the condom always a little uncomfortable. I actually enjoy other forms of getting of (by hand or oral) better if it means I get to climax without a condom.

[–]Old-Compote-9991left-wing male advocate 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The pill is not the only method of birth control guys. There are literally tens of them.

She's likely to find one that she likes!

[–]XorFish 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

If you limit your options to effective birth control that does not use hormones and is reversible, then the list becomes really short. You are basically left with a copper IUD.

However they make periods worse. (Unless you use an improved version like Gynefix, but this one doesn't seem to be available in the US)

So there is currently no effective birth control option that is reversible and has no or mild side effects available right now.

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 12 points13 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

One point to consider is that birth control pills, despite having side effects, have fewer side effects than pregnancy, which is always a possibility even with a condom.

And by side effects I mean pregnancy induced complications, which include death, not "having a baby". Those complications are more likely to happen to you off the pill, with a partner who uses condoms, than on the pill. That's in fact how those pills get government approval in the first place. Contraceptives, on their own right, aren't usually considered "medicine". But the risks from the pill outweigh the risks of pregnancy complications, in terms of likelihood and severity, by quite a bit.

That said it's still her choice. Like you I think I'm somewhere in the middle on this. But I think the side effects get played up a lot by people looking to hate on men and call them misogynists ("she could have a stroke!!!! Don't you care more about that than your penis!!!"... yeah but there's a 3% chance of pregnancy and an x% chance of having a stroke from a pregnancy, and that is more likely to happen than it is from the pill).

There are of course other options for them. You can time her cycle. There are various method for that with success rates as high as traditional contraceptives. And you can get an IUD, which seems to be more popular nowadays anyway.

We can also wait on a pill for men. I mean we can't really help it that there isn't one for us. Just saying.

[–]throwra_coolname209 4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I feel that. It's also different for every person, and for a lot of different forms of BC. My ex gets just about every side effect in the book, and hated most forms of hormonal birth control. But it's disingenuous to act like it's a murderous thing to ask your partner to consider BC. If they feel like the side effects are tolerable, go for it. If they don't, then that's cool too. If I was asked to go on a medication that would probably give me terrible cramps for a few days every month I'd hesitate too.

Can't wait for male BC outside of condoms though. I wonder when pharma will realize there's a lot more money there than they think

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

One problem for the male pill is that it isn't medically justifiable. The female pill prevents medical complications from pregnancy. The male pill doesn't protect the user from medical complications though. So legally there is red tape in the way. Using the pill to have sex and not worry about pregnancy is not technically what it's prescribed for, even though that's what everyone uses it for in practice.

In Japan it took a really long time for female birth control to be approved because they have really strict standards. Feminists accused the country of being misogynistic for not approving it, but it really just had to do with their drug standards.

It's interesting that we're quick to call that sexism when it affects women though. I guess like a lot of other topics, going by their standards, men have things a lot worse. Because we don't have a pill anywhere.

[–]throwra_coolname209 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

That's interesting and a side of this I've never heard before. I always assumed it was a pharma/money thing where doing a similar thing for men was just not feasible from a difficulty and cost perspective. I'd love to hear more about the legal red tape if you know any sources

[–]Oncefa2left-wing male advocate 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They talk about that about half way through this article:


You can probably find sources for the debate in Japan also. I remember hearing it on the BBC one day. It was all about proving to Japanese regulators that it was a valid form of medicine. And there are basically two ways to do that: by having other medical benefits besides stoping pregnancy (which the female pill does have), and as a risk / reward calculation for preventing diseases (like pregnancy induced complications).

[–]ThrowAway640KB 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This was very well written. Thank you. I might not have your issues, but condom use for me is equally as stimulating as using a strap-on in place of my penis. As in, it’s a non-starter.

[–]LeonDeCool 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I saw that post earlier today and thought it might fit in nicely for discussion here. I don't think it's a cruel expectation, but I do think it's selfish and irresponsible. Selfish for the reasons OP mentioned and irresponsible because I believe that both partners are responsible for themselves and their respective bodies.

There are all kinds of birth control: hormonal, non-hormonal, long-term, short-term, permanent, reversible, and types that can be used by one partner or both. I don't believe that I, as a man, should have any say over what birth control pill or shot or implant is best for a woman's body and her eggs. Not my body, not my choice, not my right, and not my responsibility.

It's the right and responsibility of a WOMAN to determine what birth control, hormonal or otherwise, will work best for her and her body, not her partners. If she chooses not to use those methods or doesn't like what's available on the market today, it's still her responsibility to take care of her own body and its reproductive ability if she doesn't want to get pregnant. It's not suddenly my or any other mans right or responsibility to to take control over her body and make executive decisions to stop her from getting pregnant just because she doesn't want to use a given type of birth control. That's her right and her responsibility as a grown ass adult, whether she likes it or not.

Just as if I don't want to father a child, it's my responsibility to take of my body and its reproductive ability by wearing a condom, getting a vasectomy, using spermicide, etc, it's her job to do the same to manage her own reproductive capabilities. To me, this is another one of those areas where feminism has encouraged women to go for equal rights without taking on any of the burden of effort or responsiblity that comes with being a full fledged adult under the law.

[–]grankasaurus 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I understand that this doesn’t really answer the “is it bad to” question posed here, but I’d like to highlight an option for getting around the issue entirely:


Mine cost me $700 plus a week off of work on pain killers and sitting on an ice pack. It solves the problem as permanently as you want it to (can be reversed), is cost effective compared to monthly birth control expenses in 12-18 months, nobody has to get their hormones all fucked up, and it almost completely removes the risk of pregnancy.

[–]DmajCyberNinja 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think it's mostly the extremes on the internet. Dont take random strangers on the internet for more seriously than you can bare. They don't know you, and if you calmly engage and they still are assholes, I would discredit them.

But women, imo, are expected to have the protection more than, and I would say that's unjust. On the flip side, they have more options than the pill.

But to answer your question, it's because women are perceived to be more sexually oppressed. Every circumstance is different, yours especially, so if someone can't respect that, keep it moving.

[–]sweetbunnyblood -4 points-3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

There's also other bc methods... Pulling out is statistically almost the same as condoms (source in this thread, you're welcome to look it up!) There's also female condoms, supermicides, and other ones I wouldn't recommend but do exist.

[–]FraSkywalker 8 points9 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Actually, pulling out is much more dangerous than using a condom. Sperm can exit before reaching climax, even without the man noticing, and it makes it more dangerous, not to mention sexually transmitted diseases. It is more dangerous.

[–]sweetbunnyblood 2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

It seems counter intuitive, but studies show that it's very comparable to condom use in terms of contraceptive methods!

But of course, obviously, no protection from stis, but the original thread in reference implied they are a monagmous, long term couple.

[–]DevilishRogue 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

There was a lot of anti-withdrawal propaganda put about at the time of the AIDS epidemic to encourage condom use that has seeped into the psyche of the West. People are now emotionally invested in slating withdrawal because they've believed it to be an ineffective form of birth control for so long despite it being more effective than condoms in real terms unless condoms are combined with another form of birth control.

[–]sweetbunnyblood 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes! It's DEFINITELY still super important to protect against stis but it's actually good. Fuck, condom and withdrawal is pretty much fool proof.

[–]sweetbunnyblood 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I can see guys here though getting freaked, thinking it's some trick to get women preggers....

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Sperm can exit before reaching climax

Much less likely to happen than a condom breaking.

[–]DanteLivra 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

In our crazy world, any guys who don't wear a condom with someone they don't trust 100% is asking for a paternity fraud.

Wear a condom guys, latex sex is still sex.

[–]AdamChap 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Condom is not full proof. If you don't trust - don't dick.

[–]a-man-from-earthleft-wing male advocate 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No. For some of us, latex sex is no sex.

[–]confusedbonobo007 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why is it that any man who expresses that condoms don’t work well for him and aren’t good for sex are treated like misogynists, assholes, or patriarchal? Why do we uplift female sexuality and empower women who choose what to do with their bodies, but then denigrate men who dislike condom usage, and treat them as bad people?

Anyone who does this is terrible. But I want to clarify.

Regarding the thread above, I think it would actually be very inconsiderate to expect your partner to only use condoms for the rest of his life and never get permission to go inside raw unless trying to attain pregnancy.

I think this is just communication. Communicate with the person. Say that you never want to take BC and ask the person if they think they are ok with it, and if they ever change their mind, they'll let you know and part ways if need be.

I don't think its inconsiderate to expect something like that. I don't think it would be inconsiderate to say something like "X is off limits for me, indefinitely/forever". I don't think its the type of expectation that can even be inconsiderate, its someone holding to their values. Its just an expectation some people have. And that's OK AS LONG AS they are honest and up front about it.

Do you agree?

[–]Interesting_Doubt_17 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm quite surprised nobody mentioned other types of sexual activities. E.g. oral, anal, mutual masturbation or anything that doesn't involve penetration/intercourse.

They might not be 100% safe cause you might still get STD's. At least, one of them prevents pregnancy.

[–]g_squidman -3 points-2 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

What exactly do people here consider "left wing?" Is just anybody left wing now?

[–]dzialamdzielo 1 point2 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

What about this is not left-wing? It's pretty much apolitical by my reading. Mind pointing out what you find to be political and/or non-left-wing?

[–]g_squidman 0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy Link

Well yeah, exactly. It's not, like, partially Anti-Capitalist or progressive or anything. This sub reads like a clone of r/MensRights basically. It's just anti-feminist and that's all the politics there is. Seems like a recent thing too, cause I've been here a while.

Edit: I feel like it suddenly just got popular to be a "leftist" or something for some reason and a lot of people don't really know what that means.

[–]dzialamdzielo 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Human rights and a respect for human dignity isn't inherently leftist? Right-wingers, globally, actively want to be able to mutilate children with abandon, ergo it's left-wing to fight for only consensual genital cutting.

Plus feminism isn't mentioned once in the post you're responding to.

EDIT: it's EXTREMELY progressive to want to extend protection against forced genital cutting into childhood for children of all sexes. Are you under the impression that that's somehow, somewhere the status quo?

[–]Interesting_Doubt_17 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Are you a wokescold?

[–]g_squidman 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

I'm a gender abolitionist, so if that is that then sure.

[–]dzialamdzielo 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

So treating the genitals of all children the same should be right up your alley, no?

[–]g_squidman 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

"gender abolition" is not a great term for what I mean as it doesn't seem to immediately communicate the concept very well. It's just the closest term I've heard other people use in reference to similar frameworks. I mean, I'm not a sex abolitionist.

But I am against infant circumcision if that's all you're asking. Like I mentioned, I spent a lot of time on the old /r/MensRights sub.

[–]dzialamdzielo 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well that and banning non-medically necessary sex "normalization" surgeries for intersex children, too.

[–]g_squidman 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah good point. I know some people call themselves "gender abolitionist" as a way to be bigoted against transgender people and that is not at all what I'm talking about. It's more a matter of applying feminist ideas in a way that's mirrored for every gender. That's why I dont like r/menslib. It doesn't apply feminism to men. It just gives men's issues a small section within feminism from a female perspective. And I don't really like what this sub has become either. It's more focused on criticizing feminism and women than talking about men's issues progressively and constructively. I'm actually pretty agnostic about feminism.

[–]AdamChap 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Go to r/menslib if you want to stop seeing anti-feminist rhetoric or discussion.

Thinking left wing has to be "partially Anti-Capitalist", outs you as pretty far left - which would explain why you think this sub isn't left enough.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

What do you define as "left wing"?

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2023. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter