"I laughed when I heard him scream"

[–]unbannable9412 42 points43 points44 points 12 years ago (77 children) | Copy Link

[+]Pocketlizard 12 years ago [recovered] (27 children) | Copy Link

A huge problem with the fight against MGM is the seeming inability for anyone to talk about it without attacking cut men. We're talking about a large segment of the population, and every time I hear this topic come up it's all, "you were mutilated! You can't enjoy sex as much! Your parents did this! You're less than!"

The reality is that many, I dare say the majority, of cut men live happy, full lives where they enjoy sex and don't feel the need to harbor any sort of animosity toward others for something that is a non-issue to them (to THEM, don't go crazy).

Given that, when someone comes at them with all of the above, it's no wonder they react the way they do. Then when they say, "No, my life is fine" the response is, "that's just a psychological defense since this was clearly horrible for you!"

Nobody likes to have victim status forced upon them, and until people realize that and stop alienating a huge segment of the population, nothing will get done.

[–]Workchoices 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]johnmarkley 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I dare say the majority, of cut men live happy, full lives where they enjoy sex and don't feel the need to harbor any sort of animosity toward others for something that is a non-issue to them (to THEM, don't go crazy).

Except it's not "to them" when someone comes swaggering into one of these conversations to announce, "My dick is awesome, so you should be fine with involuntary circumcision, your own included." Which is what almost invariably precedes the "attacks."

We're talking about a large segment of the population, and every time I hear this topic come up it's all, "you were mutilated! You can't enjoy sex as much! Your parents did this!"

"Involuntarily circumcised boys have been mutilated" is the crux of the whole idea that circumcision is significantly wrong in the first place. Dropping that claim is effectively dropping serious opposition to the practice. Similarly, it's difficult to argue against a practice if pointing out one of the more conspicuous negative effects of that practice is declared out of bounds.

None of these things are "attacks," unless any statement that it's wrong and harmful to chop off or otherwise damage pieces of other people's bodies without their permission is an "attack."

You're less than!"

I have never, in my entire life, seen anyone so much as hint that being circumcised makes a man less valuable as a human being.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ShaidarHaran2[S] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrArtless 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DerekAcorah 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pocketlizard1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]marauderp -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ShaidarHaran2[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree that both sides are stupid, and both were happening in this thread. A very long thread I just had with someone (moorethanafeeling) was just half deleted I guess after he realized his position was indefensible, he kept saying I thought he was a monster or victim which you can see by my replies to the deleted comments was never the case, I was merely making an analogy to show his poor argument (if everyone had their earlobes cut off, few would realize it's not the norm, since he said he never realized cut was not the norm. I was only speaking to that one argument, and he went on this tirade about victims and monsters and whatnot). In the end he came out saying uncut guys looked mutilated to him, so even apart from all the straw men arguments he had been putting up he made the same argument he claimed to be against, lol.

[–]Pocketlizard1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Workchoices 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kronox 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]unbannable9412 17 points18 points19 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]rg57 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]unbannable9412 12 points13 points14 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted]6 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]johnmarkley 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rg57 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Tusse 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]chavelah 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]rg57 12 points13 points14 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]xNOM 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]chavelah 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]xNOM 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Slutlord-Fascist 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]moorethanafeeling -8 points-7 points-6 points 12 years ago (47 children) | Copy Link

[–]unbannable9412 14 points15 points16 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]dylanrush -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]johnmarkley 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Tusse 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]unbannable9412 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]dylanrush -9 points-8 points-7 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yes, you were mutilated against your will as a child in a pointless pseudo-medical procedure on par in legitimacy as lobotomizing people.

Not only is your comment pretty ridiculous and untrue (circumcision has shown to reduce HPV transmission rates,) it is a perfect example of what /u/Pocketlizard was saying elsewhere in this thread:

A huge problem with the fight against MGM is the seeming inability for anyone to talk about it without attacking cut men. We're talking about a large segment of the population, and every time I hear this topic come up it's all, "you were mutilated! You can't enjoy sex as much! Your parents did this! You're less than!"

The reality is that many, I dare say the majority, of cut men live happy, full lives where they enjoy sex and don't feel the need to harbor any sort of animosity toward others for something that is a non-issue to them (to THEM, don't go crazy).

Given that, when someone comes at them with all of the above, it's no wonder they react the way they do. Then when they say, "No, my life is fine" the response is, "that's just a psychological defense since this was clearly horrible for you!"

Nobody likes to have victim status forced upon them, and until people realize that and stop alienating a huge segment of the population, nothing will get done.

[–]unbannable94127 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

circumcision has shown to reduce HPV transmission rates

And flaying someone alive reduces skin cancer rates, what's your fucking point.

And as 46n2arejustaheadofme put it

Male circumcision is unequivocally genital mutilation, and men who had their foreskins removed in infancy were victims of MGM, even if they don't recognize it. The words mutilation and victim are not defined by "feeling mutilated" or "feeling like a victim," and unfortunately many men are unable to or unwilling to recognize this, which inevitably continues the cycle. Male denial of the harm of MGM is a considerable barrier to having the practice banned.

Quit fucking implicitly condoning MGM just because you're too intellectually and emotionally inadequate to deal with the fact that it is genital mutilation and those it is forced on are victims of it.

Something else to take into account as well, just so you know what you're condoning.

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1v1atf/this_says_it_all/ceoagx6

[–]MaestroLogical -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

This is the real reason why this is such a divisive topic within the MRM. The fact that the supporters of ending MGM are hellbent on creating a victim class to bolster support. This is where the majority of strife is being created.

If you want to have valid debate on this issue with everyone, stop being so damn concerned with turning everyone into a victim. I don't care if I was victimized as an infant, because I don't feel like a victim. In fact, had I NOT been mutilated as an infant, I know for a fact I would've had a much harder time as a teenager. The fact of the matter is, when you mutilate an entire generation of kids, those left 'pure' will be outcasts. Had I not had a 'normal' penis, the laughter would have spread like wildfire through the lunchroom. I know this because it happened to a friend that was uncut.

The hard truth is, I would feel like more of a victim as an adult, having not been victimized as an infant. Than I do having had it 'forced' on me by caring parents that didn't know any better.

This is the divide. Stop desperately trying to paint me as something I'm not and we might be able to make some real progress with ending this practice. Leave the semantics for other threads, I understand fully that I was indeed violated by being cut. But if they'd not done it, and asked 14 year old me if I wanted to, I would've, to fit in. That doesn't make me a victim. It makes me willing to sacrifice to fit in with societies expectations. If you want to discuss things with me, don't come at me with pity I don't deserve or want. I'm not a victim of MGM just because I was cut as that was the prevailing norm when I was born. I'd actually venture to say that the real victims are the ones that got outcast as pariah for NOT being cut. They are the ones desperately projecting.

So you wanna hash this out and get more of us 'cut' men on board? Stop talking down to us and start talking to us. Stop handwaving away our experiences just because they don't line up with yours or your agenda. Another movement does that well enough, which is another reason why this is 'such an uphill battle' Because you can't even calm down long enough to realize you're resorting to 'their' tactics of shaming anyone that doesn't agree...

I digress. This is a real issue, but not one we will make any progress on until we stop trying to push complexes onto others and start accepting both sides of the coin.

[–]Black_caped_man 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The fact that the supporters of ending MGM are hellbent on creating a victim class to bolster support.

...stop being so damn concerned with turning everyone into a victim.

I don't care if I was victimized as an infant, because I don't feel like a victim.

I'm not a victim of MGM just because I was cut as that was the prevailing norm when I was born.

Stop talking down to us and start talking to us. Stop handwaving away our experiences just because they don't line up with yours or your agenda.

I'm going to paraphrase Reginald D Hunter right now. We are not talking down to you, we are not hand-waving away your experiences because they don't line up with ours, they are disregarded because they are not what we are talking about. But do you know why you think this? And this is I think one of the bigger reasons to the strife in this issue. It's because you are listening to us, not with your mind or your intellect, but with your feelings.

Why are your experiences disregarded? Because you are happy and content with what you have, and that's great for you, don't get me wrong. The thing is that there are a whole lot of guys out there who actually feel like the victims they are. This whole debate is for them and about them and those who will take their place in the future. And to be technical, it doesn't matter if you feel like a victim or not, you can be a victim without feeling like you are one, and you can feel like a victim without being one. But again, this isn't about you if you are happy with your life.

But if they'd not done it, and asked 14 year old me if I wanted to, I would've, to fit in.

Only further undermining why this should be a choice only for adults, would a 14 year old be allowed to get a tattoo? would you be allowed to surgically remove any other body part without medical need? This is exactly the time to bring up a tired old cliché: "and if everybody went and jumped off a cliff would you do the same just to fit in too?"

I understand why you feel you would have made that choice, kids can be brutal, I know, trust me on that. But still, this is not a good argument.

About the victim/non-victim thing. Think of someone that was born blind, they have lived their whole life being blind. They can't even begin to imagine "seeing". Their basic worth as humans is the same, but you can't not agree that they are at a disadvantage. Think of someone born with only one arm, they don't know how it is to have two arms, they are content with their life and they feel like they can do things just fine. They have adapted and do their best, but they still lack an arm, you can't disregard this. We are working on ways to restore sight to those who have lost it, even to some who never had it (IIRC), we are making prosthetic limbs to those who have lost them or never had them. We are doing this because we realize the fact that these people are lacking something.

Circumcised men are lacking a foreskin, it's use has been proven and explained. Take the above examples and change one factor, have the blindness and limblessness be the result of a surgery. Something was removed from these people yet they don't know this. They would probably feel the same but this will not remove the truth from the fact. They were victims of being robbed of a body part. It doesn't matter what they feel like.

TL;DR If you are happy with your body despite being circumcised the discussion is not about you. If you won't accept that you are (or at least were) a victim of genital mutilation, you are closing your eyes on reality. You can be perfectly content with your life and still being the victim of mutilation. I repeat, the reason we talk about the actual horrors of MGM is for those who actually suffer from them and for those who will suffer from them in the future.

[–]unbannable9412 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ShaidarHaran2[S] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago* (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]moorethanafeeling -5 points-4 points-3 points 12 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]moorethanafeeling -2 points-1 points0 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ZQMFGB1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ShaidarHaran2[S] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]ShaidarHaran25 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No, I'm talking to you, about you, pertaining to the conversation between you and I. Let me quote you to you, since you seem to not know what past you said.

You-

If I didn't know what circumcision is, I wouldn't have ever known I'm circumcised. How can I put up a defense for something that I didn't even know I had done to me until like 6th grade?

Me -

This doesn't hold up to much examination. If you never told a girl her clitoris was cut out, she probably would not know until adulthood either. If we cut off everyones earlobes, people wouldn't figure it out until they were older too.

You-

What am I supposed to say to this? I'm a monster? I hate my parents? You're trying to make victims out of a group of people who are generally glad they got circumcised.

Can you see where you made a ridiculous jump here? You downvoting me (and I assume it's you because frankly only one of us is being reasonable) doesn't change that, I never made you out to be a victim or a monster and you came out swinging with those straw men. Exactly as I said and predicted always happens in these conversations.

[–]Tusse 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]moorethanafeeling 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Eryemil1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]ShaidarHaran2[S] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pornaltaccount2 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AlexLoverOMG 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Douggem 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]ShaidarHaran2[S] 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]moorethanafeeling -8 points-7 points-6 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]xNOM 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]moorethanafeeling -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]xNOM3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ShaidarHaran2[S] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]moorethanafeeling -5 points-4 points-3 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]ShaidarHaran25 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'll take this as an admission of you being wrong in our other thread of comments if you hopped over here instead. And yes, you kept painting yourself as being called a victim and a monster which no one here had said of you, hence using mock offense as a tool to defend ridiculous positions.

At the very least, you seem to have figured out what a metaphor is, that's progress of a sort. If I were you this would devolve into a bunch of comments about how you called me a feminist, which I know you didn't do because it's a metaphor for another argument.

I'm actually glad my parents had me circumcised. Is that impossible to believe?

Sticking with the straw men, I see. I never said you could not be glad. Please point out where I did, if you want to prove you're not using mock offense as a tool.

[–]moorethanafeeling-5 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AlexLoverOMG5 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ShaidarHaran22 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]moorethanafeeling-5 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Eryemil0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Workchoices 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Dimoniquid 25 points26 points27 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]SpiritofJames 18 points19 points20 points 12 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PierceHarlan 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]gndn 17 points18 points19 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]deeptimeswimmer 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]luxury_banana 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]JohnNashoba 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Curious_Swede 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]DerekAcorah 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Eryemil 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Le4chanFTW 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ShortWarrior 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Le4chanFTW 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hugglebunny87 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]weareequal 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheMightyCheng 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]mirazatha 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]raesmond -53 points-52 points-51 points 12 years ago (211 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arby01 14 points15 points16 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]raesmond -14 points-13 points-12 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Arby01 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mirazatha 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]deadalnix 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]raesmond -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Eryemil 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (149 children) | Copy Link

Circumcision by a medical professional is not genetal mutilation [sic]

Point of order:

mu·ti·late ˈmyo͞otlˌāt/ verb verb: mutilate; 3rd person present: mutilates; past tense: mutilated; past participle: mutilated; gerund or present participle: mutilating

1. inflict a violent and disfiguring injury on.

gen·i·tals (jĕn′ĭ-tlz) pl.n. The reproductive organs, especially the external sex organs.

Seems like genital mutilation to me.

May I presume that you don't think that killing, in the name of your brand of invisible space daddy, is actually murder?

[–]raesmond -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (148 children) | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (147 children) | Copy Link

[–]raesmond -3 points-2 points-1 points 12 years ago (146 children) | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (145 children) | Copy Link

No, but you want to see it as such because it allows you to make an ad hominem attack.

It's like a straw ad hominum. But since you are game, I am as well.

Let's take you back 6 months to 5th grade and compare and contrast, shall we?

Both are medical surgical procedures
Both are done without the informed consent of the victim or the guardians of same
Both remove a part of the body and cause immense pain.
The parts are then used to profit.

Now, contrast:

You only get one foreskin, contrasted with two kidneys
Removing the foreskin -genital mutilation- perfectly legal in the US
The Kindeys (whole) are considered more important as their function has been better studied
Organ removal is never ever subject to some dumbass saying "well, ti's not that bad
Kindney removal is considered a crime against all victims regardless of gender, opposed to genital mutilation, which is only a crime when performed on females.

Now, let's try another analogy. Do you think female circumcision is a big deal?

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

1: Organ harvesting is not a medical procedure. They cut you open and take your organs, that isn't a medical procedure. 2: Circumcision requires the guardians consent. The fact that you didn't know this is kind of concerning. 3: Immense pain? Anesthesia is used during circumcisions. Again, you should know this. 4: Foreskin is used for profit? I guess you mean the surgery. The medical industry is a multi trillion dollar a year industry. The idea that a $200 dollar surgery even charts on their radar is laughable. In addition circumcision helps prevent infections which would make much more money if that was the end goal.

now contrast: 1: You have two kidneys, are you under the impression that organ harvesters only take one organ per victim? Organ harvesters take everything, they kill you and they take everything. I hate to break the truth of the world to you but a person who's willing to open you up and take an organ is not going to wince at killing you for extra profit. 2: It's legal, I'm not sure how that makes your point. 3: You sound sceptical of this one. The kidneys are more important than foreskin, you need them to live. 4: Maybe that's because organ removal is a bad thing. Just a thought. 5: Circumcision isn't illegal because it doesn't harm the child. It's not wrong to recognize the difference between harmed and unharmed.

I don't know if you didn't know this, but female circumcision removes some pretty vital parts of the vagina. The labia and the clitoris is removed. This is done to make sex less enjoyable for women so they won't be tempted to have sex. Those two things aren't equivalent.

The best I can make of this is that you are actually under the impression that circumcision is as bad as organ harvesting. And at some points you claimed it was worse, which is insane. You can argue ethics all day long but circumcision is just not as bad as organ harvesting. Well there's something I never thought I would have to explain to someone.

[–]MockingDead3 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

1: Organ harvesting is not a medical procedure. They cut you open and take your organs, that isn't a medical procedure.

Hmmm - they do it in hospitals and it requires medical knowledge. And it's a procedure.

So we know you don't understand definitions.

2: Circumcision requires the guardians consent. The fact that you didn't know this is kind of concerning.

I mentioned that it requires the guardians consent. The fact that you didn't see that is kind of concerning. It also invalidates your entire argument. Pay attention, or don't play.

3: Immense pain? Anesthesia is used during circumcisions. Again, you should know this.

Not until recently. Mine was not. Many people still don't think it's necessary for an infant under 10 days old.

Again, you should know this. But you don't, so you pretend you are making a valid argument

4: Foreskin is used for profit? I guess you mean the surgery. The medical industry is a multi trillion dollar a year industry. The idea that a $200 dollar surgery even charts on their radar is laughable. In addition circumcision helps prevent infections which would make much more money if that was the end goal.

Nope I mean this

But, if you knew anything about circumcision, you'd know this. So now you are shown to be woefully ignorant of the topic, whilst you attack my supposed ignorance.

I don't know if you didn't know this, but female circumcision removes some pretty vital parts of the vagina. The labia and the clitoris is removed. This is done to make sex less enjoyable for women so they won't be tempted to have sex. Those two things aren't equivalent.

Male genital mutilation removes nerve endings. This makes sex less enjoyable for men. Also, enjoyment isn't a vital part of the vagina - the labia and the clitoris are not necessary or important or essential. To claim so is to refute the removal of the foreskin. To whit:

If you believe that pleasure via stimulation of nerves is a vital function of the sex organ, then the foreskin is as vital as the labia and the clitoris.

If you do not, then the clitoris and the labia are not vital, and can be removed without harm, just as the foreskin.

In case one, you are wrong. In case two, you are a hyporcite.

The best I can make of this is that you are actually under the impression that circumcision is as bad as organ harvesting. And at some points you claimed it was worse, which is insane. You can argue ethics all day long but circumcision is just not as bad as organ harvesting. Well there's something I never thought I would have to explain to someone.

Here's the rub: The foreskin is taken from the child without their consent, and with the fraudulent consent of the Guardian. The guardian is led to believe that it is necessary due to cleanliness, religiosity, or health - all absolutely unwarranted reasons.

And yes, taking the foreskin is organ harvesting. You are attempting to make a claim that it's false equivalency. I never said that. I never even implied that harvesting kindeys was less bad than harvesting the foreskin. You did, in a poor attempt to prove your argument.

Both are organ harvesting. And so do we agree that organ harvesting is bad? If yes, then both are bad. We don't say a crime wasn't committed when someone is mugged for $20 dollars because another criminal mugged someone for $200. That is your argument against mine. That because it's not as bad, it's ok.

That is simply false. A crime is a crime. Except when committed on a man by a woman. But that's another subreddit altogether

Also, you're moving goal posts. At first you said circumcision was OK, now you agree that it's bad, but not as bad. Pick a side or accept that you've lost.

However, since you are woefully ignorant of facts, I expected to have to explain this to you.

[–]raesmond-2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Woah, you are drifting away from reality hard.

They do it in hospitals and it requires medical knowledge. And it's a procedure. So we know you don't understand definitions.

Last I checked the definition of medicine wasn't Things done in a hospital.

medicine: the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease.

What illness does organ harvesting prevent?

Maybe you should actually read the definition before using it in your argument.

Both are done without the informed consent of the victim or the guardians of same.

I mentioned that it requires the guardians consent.

Copy and paste, two statements, both yours.

Many people still don't think it's necessary for an infant under 10 days old.

Except, you know, doctors. Doctors are aware that anesthesia is necessary. Besides, seeing as anesthesia is required now I'm not really sure what point you think you're making. Also, you're roughly 20. They used anesthesia on your circumcision.

Nope I mean this

I can't believe I have to explain this but, that article isn't real. It's written by a random yahoo user talking about a rumor that turned out to be false. The thing she's referring to is a skin cream that has cultured cells collected from foreskin they received twenty years ago.

The San Diego City Beat reports that SkinMedica hasn't harvested a foreskin in 20 years. The company instead grows the cells it needs from a single foreskin sample.

Male genital mutilation removes nerve endings. This makes sex less enjoyable for men.

The nerve endings you're referring to, are generic skin nerve endings. They're no different from the nerve endings you have now. You just have less skin. And you don't derive less pleasure from sex. I repeat, there is no difference of enjoyment between having foreskin and not. Here's a link to stories from people who have had an adult circumcision and not one person writes about enjoying sex less. I have no idea what gave you that impression.

cleanliness, religiosity, or health - all absolutely unwarranted reasons.

Health concerns are unwarranted?

Both are organ harvesting.

No it isn't.

A crime is a crime. Except when committed on a man by a woman.

The fuck is wrong with you?

At first you said circumcision was OK, now you agree that it's bad, but not as bad.

The hell are you talking about? I never agreed it was bad.

However, since you are woefully ignorant of facts, I expected to have to explain this to you.

1 You thought that organ harvesting was a medical procedure.

2 You thought that Foreskin was sold for profit. Based on a yahoo user article.

3 You thought male circumcision reduced enjoyment of sex.

This is just sad.

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

It's not bullshit, but i realize you'd rather attack my analogy than see your flawed thinking. My analogy was not the best analogy, but rather than try to understand it, you attacked it. You had no desire to debate the topic, only to find someone whom you could attack. I shan't be that person. And that is why I stopped arguing with you, and labelled you a troll (type 2).

I am not ignoring the truth. The truth is MGM is bad, as bad as FGM, but you, being a feminist, do not consider it that bad. If a just society took that tack, it would rapidly fall apart. But a just society punishes all crimes, regardless of the severity and the gender of the victim.

The truth, that you think I ignore, is that you are sexist and don't believe man and women should be equal. If you did, you would be just as against male genital mutilation as female genital mutilation. It is unethical, you know it's unethical, but yet you want to give it a pass.

I am glad not every one is like you.

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You didn't refute my last round of reasonings remember, the only thing you've done sense then is trying to convince me that the bullshit facts you pulled were analogies. Which is a pretty desperate move in my book.

not nearly as desperate as attacking the analogy rather than understanding it.

You like trading insults, not debating. hence the tag

not abstract word, learn to read

The analogy is not particularly abstract. And the fact that you think it was an ad hoc abstraction now shows you need to learn to debate and read.

Are you quite done? You never "won" this debate because from the start you failed to understand my argument and you failed to make your argument - you simply attacked mine. That's fine if you want me to shut up and feel like a big bad winner on the internet, but sad for you.

I've upgraded you to Idiot Troll Type 1, by the way.

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

not nearly as desperate as attacking the analogy rather than understanding it.

I understand the analogy just fine, the problem is that all of the connections were completely false...

You claimed that organ harvesting was medical because it is, and I quote, "done in a hospital". Which was false.
You claimed that circumcisions were done without consent of the legal guardians. Which was false.
You claimed that circumcisions cause immense pain. Which was false.
You claimed that the foreskin is being sold for profit. Which is false.
You claimed that circumcision reduced the enjoyment of sex. Which is false.

And then, after I already explained to you that all of these things were wrong, you tried to claim that a circumcision was literally organ harvesting. Making it not an analogy but a direct statement.

Of course I'm going to argue against your points, your points are wrong. Oh, and out of the two of us, you are the one who is avoiding debating, so I'm going to say this one last time.

You did not refute my last round of reasonings. You backed off because you now know that everything I said was true, and every lie I dismantled was false. You don't have an argument and so you don't provide an argument. You are basing your opinions on false facts that you can neither explain or defend. And so you've stopped trying...

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Every single fact you've presenting has been a downright proven lie,

Source?

You claimed that organ harvesting was medical because it is, and I quote, "done in a hospital". Which was false.
You claimed that circumcisions were done without consent of the legal guardians. Which was false.
You claimed that circumcisions cause immense pain. Which was false.
You claimed that the foreskin is being sold for profit. Which is false.
You claimed that circumcision reduced the enjoyment of sex. Which is false.

I've explained this all to you and provided articles backing up my claims. That's when you stopped trying to argue remember? It's not my fault you're having trouble keeping up, if you want to stop commenting and just leave the argument where it is you have that right. It's not like you've refuted anything I've been saying for the last dozen or so comments anyways. You've just kind of ignored it all.

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You claimed that organ harvesting was medical because it is, and I quote, "done in a hospital". Which was false.

So you claim

You claimed that circumcisions were done without consent of the legal guardians. Which was false.

I did no such thing.

You claimed that circumcisions cause immense pain. Which was false

So you claim, it's not well studied.

You claimed that the foreskin is being sold for profit. Which is false.

Out dated claim, but not really germane to the argument.

You claimed that circumcision reduced the enjoyment of sex. Which is false.

So you claim. This is contested.

I've explained this all to you and provided articles backing up my claims

So you claim. This is false.

What you have't done is argued why you think cutting up baby boys is totally ok, except that it may have some small benefit - a contested subject outside the US (who is MGM crazy). many countries do not think male genital mutilation is beneficial at all.

Further, all you have done is shown my argument was poorly constructed, you did not say why we should be ok with cutting up baby men.

Further, you seem to see a difference between male genital mutilation and female circumcision. You claim it causes a loss of sexual pleasure in women but not for men? Source? And I mean real sources, not ad verecundium arguments.

You really want me to agree that it's totally ok to cut up boys junk (but not women's). I haven't seen hate and sexism this bad outside of SRS.

Preach on SRSTER!

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

1: Organ harvesting is not a medical procedure. They cut you open and take your organs, that isn't a medical procedure.

Hmmm - they do it in hospitals and it requires medical knowledge. And it's a procedure.

So we know you don't understand definitions.

Copy and paste. You making the point that because it was done in a hospital and required medical knowledge it's medical.

BTW, the actual definition of medicine is

med·i·cine: the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease

And then.

You claimed that circumcisions were done without consent of the legal guardians. Which was false.

I did no such thing.

I'm just going to copy and paste this

Both are done without the informed consent of the victim or the guardians of same.

And then.

You claimed that circumcisions cause immense pain. Which was false

So you claim, it's not well studied.

They use anesthetics guy, and anesthetics are ridiculously well studied. All drugs go through decades of study before use. You should know this.

You claimed that the foreskin is being sold for profit. Which is false.

Out dated claim, but not really germane to the argument.

It's not an outdated claim, there wasn't a period where foreskin was being sold for profit. You got that from a yahoo user article and the article was wrong.

I've explained this all to you and provided articles backing up my claims.

So you claim. This is false.

I've been linking for the past few days, you haven't been paying attention.

Here are the links again if you'd actually like to read them.

Further, all you have done is shown my argument was poorly constructed, you did not say why we should be ok with cutting up baby men.

MEDICAL BENEFITS

Further, you seem to see a difference between male genital mutilation and female circumcision. You claim it causes a loss of sexual pleasure in women but not for men? Source? And I mean real sources, not ad verecundiam arguments.

Read this.

You really want me to agree that it's totally ok to cut up boys junk (but not women's).

The difference is that cutting off the clit does reduce the enjoyment of sex. Which is why it's performed in most countries. This wikipedia article explains most of it. I'm assuming you agree that female circumcision is fucked up. Apparently you think that all optional surgeries are bad without reason, but you have to understand that these two surgeries are different things with different effects. One is entirely beneficial while the other is entirely malicious. It's not a double standard to know the difference, it's the absence of a false equivalence.

[–]MockingDead2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Conclusively decided? These aren't decisions, they're studies, and they are completely conclusive. And europe has never disputed the medical benefits. Also you can't just make an analogy about removing someone's eye if there's no similarity. I can relate the removal of the appendix or of the tonsils to the removal of an eye but it wouldn't make those procedures any less important. You're just afraid of circumcision, you use the word mutilate and phrase it "cutting up an infants dick" and that makes you afraid. So afraid that you'd be willing to let children die by infections they never would have contracted just so that you don't have to deal with your fear. I'm kind of freaked out by the idea of someone cutting out my tonsils but that doesn't mean I want other peoples children to die over my irrational fear.

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

These aren't decisions, they're studies, and they are completely conclusive

odd, I have studies that claim the sun revolves around the earth (from before the common ere). I have studies from the '60s that claim dietary cholesterol is bad for you and created by high cholesterol foods. I have studies where doctors recommend smoking from the 40s and 50s.

So please tell me how conclusive your studies are when they aren't shared by others in the field.

You're just afraid of circumcision, you use the word mutilate and phrase it "cutting up an infants dick" and that makes you afraid.

No, I am not afraid. I use those phrases because that is precisely what it is. Now who has a problem with the truth? I am not afraid of male genital mutilation. I don't think the "medical benefits" are substantial enough to warrant it's use.

So afraid that you'd be willing to let children die by infections they never would have contracted just so that you don't have to deal with your fear.

You are so afraid of rare infections that you are willing to cut up a boys dick to have to deal with that fear.

We don't remove everyone's appendix at birth on the chance that they could become infected later. Nor do we remove tonsils at birth on that chance. So why do we cut up boys dicks?

Religion and Aesthetics, that's all. And that nobody cares about men.

I'm kind of freaked out by the idea of someone cutting out my tonsils but that doesn't mean I want other peoples children to die over my irrational fear.

I am kind of freaked out by the idea of someone calling it irrational to not want to cut up a boys dick. Hey, since you are mind reading, let me join in: maybe you watch circumcisions being done for enjoyment.

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I have studies that claim the sun revolves around the earth

Oh lord you're dumb. Studies made decades if not centuries ago don't discredit current studies. You don't just get to use that line to make facts go away. These studies were not funded by big circumcision, they were funded by pediatrics, they're peer reviewed, they're not subject to your own personal misunderstanding of scientific procedure. If you could find an article contradicting it I would be happy to read it but ancient astrology just isn't relevant.

they aren't shared by others in the field.

They are shared by others in the field. This is not one study but a collection of studies.

I am not afraid

Bullshit, when someone refers to a surgery as, and I quote, "cuttin up infants," they don't understand the procedure. If I referred to the removal of tonsils as "carving out a piece of a child's throat" would you think that I was thinking about the procedure rationally? You have an irrational fear of the procedure, fueled by misinformation, and backed by ignorance.

rare infections

Not rare infections, urinary tract infections, which are both common and dangerous.

We don't remove everyone's appendix at birth on the chance that they could become infected later. Nor do we remove tonsils at birth on that chance. So why do we cut up boys dicks?

Because urinary tract infections spread to parts of the body that you can't remove, like the bladder. If you get appendicitis you can just remove the appendix and you'll be okay (usually), same with your tonsils. If your child gets a bad bladder infection he just gets hospitalised and pumped full of antibiotics, and then you just have to hope they kick in before the fever kills them.

irrational to not want to cut up a boys dick.

Alright, so now that I've explained the difference between fear phrasing and rational phrasing lets try this again. It's irrational to want other peoples kids to die because you can't handle the idea of a non-invasive surgery, which you refer to as, and again I quote, "cutting up infants." If we had it your way we would never perform any medical procedure that you could manage to phrase badly, which would be pretty much all of them:

They cut you open and sow a piece of another person inside of you.

Oops, guess we can't do organ transplants. My irrational fear says other people should die so that I don't have to face reality.

they ram a tube down your throat and force it down your intestines.

Damn, no more snaking intestines, but early detection of cancer isn't as important as me being comfortable with my blissful ignorance.

You have to understand that when I hear someone intentionally phrase common procedures like something from a snuff film, I tend to assume they probably don't have the most rational opinions on they matter.

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

washing your damned dick.

How the hell is a 3-8 year old expected to have perfect hygiene? That's not going to happen anytime soon. Kids will continue to get UTI's and die, and blaming them for that is not a solution. I personally would prefer for less kids to die, not just that we would find a way to blame it on their corpse.

Wait, I thought organ transplants weren't bad at all... but now they are?

You keep making the argument that circumcision is bad simply because you are capable of phrasing it in a bad way. Well, I just phrased organ transplants in a bad way. Does that mean organ transplants are bad, or does that mean that medical procedure isn't subject to your own personal misunderstandings?

I have already said that many countries - well-developed countries, don't share their view.

THEY DON'T DISPUTE ANYTHING! Why are you under the impression they dispute these studies. They do not. That's just more misinformation.

why not stop with the foreskin? Why not the glans? Why not replace the whole damn thing?

It's like you have no ability to accept medical procedure. Removing the glands would have no medical benefit / would have tremendous consequences. I'm not sure what point you think you're making. Again, you just ruled out all medical procedures.

Why stop at removing just the tonsils? Why not remove the tongue while you're in there.

You're right, we shouldn't perform any procedure as long as there's a more fucked up thing that you could also do. /s

So I'm going to say this very simply. You are scared shitless of the procedure based on misinformation and misunderstanding. In fact you are so scared that you are actually willing to let kids die to preventable disease because you can't handle your fallacy. Personally I would suggest you educate yourself and give up the fallacy but if you think that children dieing to infection is a more elegant solution than I guess I can't stop you.

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How the hell is a 3-8 year old expected to have perfect hygiene?

Parents teach them to?

You're right, we shouldn't perform any procedure as long as there's a more fucked up thing that you could also do. /s

I said this because your argument is absurd. You using sarcasm against your argument means you have no tenable argument.

I'm going to say this very simply. You are scared shitless of the procedure based on misinformation and misunderstanding. In fact you are so scared that you are actually willing to let kids die to preventable disease because you can't handle your fallacy. Personally I would suggest you educate yourself and give up the fallacy but if you think that children dieing to infection is a more elegant solution than I guess I can't stop you.

I am going say this very simply: No, I am not scared of male genital mutilation. I think it's terrible to cut boys dicks for no benefit

Now, since they dont' actually save lives in a significant amount, we are abck to saying you are scared. Your argument is, because of the chance of death by UTI - the chance, we should mutilate a boy. This is what actual fear looks like. You are willing to cut up every boy to protect a few boys. That's insane.

So we have now determined that in addition to insulting me, arguing against my argument and not the actual point, using shitty sources, we can add projection and fearmongering to your tactics.

Cool. Still makes you a type 2 troll.

Hey, a website that utterly destroys your UTI myth and showing that there were more complications with circumcision. That was too easy. I wish you had done it.

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Parents teach them to?

You realize it takes years and years to teach a child proper hygiene. Their ability to remember to do everything correctly isn't formed until they're older.

I am not scared of male genital mutilation.

Wait what? Buddy, that's not a point you should be making. If you really thought it was male genital mutilation you would be afraid of it. You should be mad and worried under those conditions. It would be weird if you weren't. You're getting your story twisted.

for no benefit

MEDICAL BENEFITS

don't actually save lives in a significant amount

Tell that to the parents of dead children, I'm sure they'd love to hear that because the death toll is only in the hundreds, you don't give a shit that it happens.

using shitty sources

Every single one of my sources is backed by peer reviewed science. You can't just throw that in there and hope no one notices, not after you cited a yahoo user article.

So let's talk about your source shall we.

One significant cause of chronic UTIs in girls, that has never been acknowledged in boys, is bubble baths

That's a sollid misrepresentation of reality. The thing they're talking about doesn't even affect boys.

The records of 136,086 boys born in US Army hospitals from 1980 to 1985 were reviewed for indexed complications related to circumcision status during the first month of life.

They're referring to the arab boys that were born during the Soviet war in Afghanistan. Notice how they don't say that the boys were circumcised by american doctors or even in the american hospital. They were circumcised by random Afghans who didn't know how. And yet they fail to mention that on the site, weird.

However they did mention something interesting.

There were no deaths or reported losses of the glans or entire penis. By contrast, the complications in the 35,929 uncircumcised infants were all related to urinary tract infections. Of the 88 boys with such infections (0.24%), 32 had concomitant bacteremia, three had meningitis, two had renal failure, and two died.

So even when circumcisions are performed by untrained combatants in the middle of a war zone the circumcised children have no chance of dying or losing the penis, while the uncircumcised children wind up dying to urinary tract infection.

I'm going to keep reading this site, just thought I should point out those two things while I have you here.

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm going to keep reading this site, just thought I should point out those two things while I have you here.

Go ahead, you may learn something.

And you still have not provided concrete proof that it is worth the pain and loss of sensation to cut a boys dick. Nor have you adequately explained why circumcision, if done on boys, should not be done to girls.

You seem to think that cutting up boys dicks is totes ok to prevent UTIs. Is it ok to lock people in rooms so they don't hurt themselves walking down the street? This is a similar argument - for fear of something small you want to overreact.

Edit:

Wait what? Buddy, that's not a point you should be making. If you really thought it was male genital mutilation you would be afraid of it. You should be mad and worried under those conditions. It would be weird if you weren't. You're getting your story twisted

What is this? Ad hominems now? man, you really need to learn to stay on point. You seem totally ok with male genital mutilation. You accuse me of fear mongering. It's not fear: outrage, indignant, anger, frustration, disgust. Those are what I feel at mgm - and you. But now you have found another thing, unrelated tot he argument at hand, to attack.

Get a thesaurus out and understand english before you insult me, you stinking twatchunk. I have had quite enough of you. You have not made a compelling case, I have told you this several times. You can't make a compelling case. I have told you this several times. Yet you continue as if your antagonism is going to win you any favors.

It's not.

I can't stop you from responding. At first I found it curious and entertaining, but I do think it's sad that you continue to do so.

As an aside, unrelated to the argument, maybe you should take this test.

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

worth the pain and loss of sensation

You realize I've provided proof that there is no pain or loss of sensation right? You keep trying to wiggle your argument away from having to acknowledge the facts that I've been handing you.

for fear of something small you want to overreact

TIL infant death is no big deal.

You have not made a compelling case

Bullshit, I've disproved every single thing you've thrown at me. You've slowly had to wiggle your misinformation back untill now you're straight up ignoring my argument, so here it is one last time.

Circumcision saves children's lives and has none of these side effects you keep claiming. You are arguing that kids should die to avoid having to go through a safe and commonplace medical procedure. You are arguing that we should go against the advantages of modern medicine and ignore the avoidable mortality of infants. You, are, wrong. And there is no way for you to change that.

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

At least you admit it cause immense pain. Otherwise why use anesthetics?

What? Are you retarded? That's your argument? That if the procedure didn't use anesthetics it would cause pain. My god, you are so averse to modern medicine I find it hard to take you seriously as a human being.

The down side is not worth the benefits of circumcision. I thought we covered that?

We did, you brought up a whole bunch of side effects which turned out to be bullshit, remember?

You like to dance around the fact that it is a medically unnecessary procedure, with minimal benefits, that cuts up someone. It's practically godwin inducing.

medically unnecessary procedure, with minimal benefits.

It prevents death, there is no higher benefit than the prevention of death.

We should restart human testing of chemical agents. Think of the benefits to humanity!

We actually do human testing of chemical agents, that's how all drugs are tested before being absorbed into general practice. Mind you we test it in numerous other ways first but that is a real thing.

We also ought start aborting genetically inferior fetuses. It causes no pain and has medical benefits.

This is a weird point, we actually allow parents to abort children with medical deformities. Do you disagree with that as well?

You seem to not understand much about modern medicine. I think I know now why you don't like circumcision.

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You don't get it. But you need me to be terrified to help your sleep smugly at night, to make you think you are right (you're not) and that you are better than me (again, you're not).

So fine, pigeon-troll, if that's what you must have to feel good. I give it to you.

I agree, that cutting up boys dicks without consent is so much better than just washing their dicks and being careful for UTIs. It's so much better to cause someone to bleed for what MIGHT happen. Better to toss 10 innocent folk in jail rather than let one criminal go free. We best pad everything and nanny up so nobody gets a booboo. /s

You better turn off your computer, you might start an electrical fire! And don't use a cell phone, you might get cancer. /s

Since you seem to suck at reading tone (odd, considering how much you try and mind read), I added an internet notation for sarcasm. hope that helps

I do hope this makes you happy as a kid on Christmas. However, it's very sad that someone can be so wrong and yet demand I agree with him/her.

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]autowikibot1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Ad hominem:

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person" ), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Fallacious Ad hominem reasoning is normally categorized as an informal fallacy, more precisely as a genetic fallacy, a subcategory of fallacies of irrelevance. Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact.

Interesting: Tu quoque | Argument from authority | Fallacy | Negative campaigning

Parent commenter can [toggle NSFW](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&subject=AutoWikibot NSFW toggle&message=%2Btoggle-nsfw+cgp7lnp) or [delete](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&subject=AutoWikibot Deletion&message=%2Bdelete+cgp7lnp). Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | Mods | Magic Words

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What point? I called you a retard, the only point I was pushing with that statement is that you're retarded.

Cool story, Aspie. Doesn't make my argument any less right.

What have I lost? I've slammed you with facts so hard you've stopped refuting them. I've dismantled every single lie you've told. I've produced studies that show solid medical benefits. You've brought up studies that show solid medical benefits. Just because you're ignoring reality doesn't mean I've lost, it just means you're too stubborn to let go.

Whatever you need to believe to sleep at night as a baby-mutilator, I am ok with you believing it. I have let go from convincing you not to cut up babies, but you keep suggesting we do it. So who has problems letting go?

It's called projection, Aspie. You're doing it right.

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

So you claim.

Buddy, we've done this numerous times now.

You claimed that organ harvesting was medical because it is, and I quote, "done in a hospital". Which was false.
You claimed that circumcisions were done without consent of the legal guardians. Which was false.
You claimed that circumcisions cause immense pain. Which was false.
You claimed that the foreskin is being sold for profit. Which is false.
You claimed that circumcision reduced the enjoyment of sex. Which is false.

And then I was like...

Circumcision medical benefits

sexually assaulting boys dicks

I can't believe I'm having to say this. It's a fucking medical procedure. It is not, I repeat, is not sexual assault. Here, I'm going to play a game. Every time you misrepresent a medical procedure by randomly pretending it's anything other than what it actually is I'm going to put it on a little scoreboard, let's try that.

MEDICAL MISUNDERSTANDINGS: 1

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What do you mean oblivious?

I know what you are saying. You are saying that the supposed small benefit of sexually assaulting and cutting a boys dick is worth it. You like to pretend it's not sexual assault and mutilation because the parents make the decision and there is anesthesia and it's performed in a hospital.

But how is that better than, I dunno, washing the boys dick?

"So, your kid could UTIs. What we can do is cut off a piece of his dick. It will be painful, so we'll anesthetize him, and he'll probably not remember (we don't know) and it will probably nto afefct his sexual pleasure (we think). And god wants it to happen, so there's that. And the foreskin is ugly, so this will make him pretty."

Or

"You can wash his dick."

One seems a wee bit less invasive than the other.

Not coping out, just tired of your bullshit.

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

sexually assaulting

There it is again. It's not sexual assault, just because you disagree with a procedure doesn't make it somehow sexual assault.

MEDICAL MISUNDERSTANDINGS: 2

You like to pretend it's not sexual assault and mutilation because the parents make the decision and there is anesthesia and it's performed in a hospital.

Yep, you nailed it. I like to believe medical procedures aren't sexual assault. I like to believe that obgyn's aren't just molesting patients and colonoscopies aren't anal rape. Course they're not, so I'm not really sure what point you're making.

he'll probably not remember (we don't know)

What? We do know that a newborn won't remember a circumcision. Why are you under the impression they might?

probably nto afefct his sexual pleasure (we think)

Again, we know it doesn't affect sexual pleasure, we understand psychology, physiology and anatomy. We've done research, we've even fucking asked people who have had a circumcision as adults and can actually describe the before and after. We know.

You can wash his dick.

For ten years, everyday? You call a medical procedure sexual assault and you don't have a problem with that? How do you think that might affect a kid mentally? Are you telling me you care more about foreskin than mental health?

What will you say when you find out that parents aren't going to do that, because they're not insane.

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You dodged my question again, why would you dodge such a simple question. Maybe because you know the answer is wretched.

LOl. I like how you are still taking this seriously. It's adorable.

So, it's not actually painful

But they use anesthesia. If it's not painful then they ought not. I don't need anesthesia when I clip my nails.

From the study:

This shows that the benefit of circumcision on UTI only outweighs the risk in boys who have had UTI previously and have a predisposition to repeated UTI. As this analysis has used a conservative circumcision complication rate of 2%, if the complication rate were in reality higher the risk–benefit analysis may not favour circumcision even in the higher risk populations.

In conclusion, the data we present do not support the routine circumcision of normal boys with standard risk in order to prevent UTI. However, our data suggest that circumcision of boys with higher than normal risk of UTI should be considered. As there is no direct evidence of the effect of circumcision on UTI in this group, confirmation through a randomised trial of circumcision in high risk patients would be beneficial. Using an OR of 0.2 (the upper limit of the 95% CI of the combined OR found in this study) and a power of 80%, the sample size required to study this hypothesis would be 140 (70 in each treatment arm), assuming a recurrence risk of 10%

So basically:

It's not recommended to perform circumcision unless the boy is prone to UTIs.

Interesting. That seems to coincide with my analysis of "little or no benefit."

Until this additional information is available, the present data do not support the routine circumcision of boys to prevent UTI. However, circumcision should be considered in those with recurrent UTI or significantly increased risk of UTI.

Last paragraph nails it. An unbiased international source says pretty much what I say.

Thanks for looking that up for me. I am glad you can agree with me.

[–]raesmond1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

LOl. I like how you are still taking this seriously. It's adorable.

So, the reason you said we should molest little kids is because you don't take molestation seriously? That's comforting.

But they use anesthesia. If it's not painful then they ought not.

I'll try to take this slow so you understand.

They use anesthetics, because it would be painful, but because they use anesthetics, it's not actually painful.

These are things you should be able to understand without me needing to explain them to you.

It's not recommended to perform circumcision unless the boy is prone to UTIs.

Nope, that's a misquote. The real words were.

the data we present do not support the routine circumcision of normal boys with standard risk in order to prevent UTI.

Routine, as in automatic. And we don't perform routine circumcision, we leave it up to the parents. And the data only doesn't support routine circumcision in order to prevent UTI specifically. Let's pull another quote.

Circumcision was associated with a significantly reduced risk of UTI (OR = 0.13; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.20; p<0.001) with the same odds ratio (0.13) for all three types of study design.

Your quote was from the author himself, who apparently is trying really hard to twist the study. He assumes an equal utility of the harm of circumcision to the harm of a UTI. Despite the fact that the death rate from circumcision is 1 / 500000 in the us. And the death rate from uti's is over 1 / 50. Which means that if every 1% of boys gets it that's 1 / 5000 boys dying to UTI. 100 times more that circumcision, hows that for equal utility. And that's just UTI, I don't even need to get into the other benefits.

An unbiased international source says pretty much what I say.

You should really check what your reading before getting cocky.

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What molestation comment?

You can wash his dick.

That molestation comment. And you aren't even denying it.

are told it is a necessary procedure

No they aren't. They are told it will prevent disease, which it does.

I did read the study. It says that circumcision is not necessary.

It does not, that's the blogger again. This is the results of the study:

Circumcision was associated with a significantly reduced risk of UTI (OR = 0.13; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.20; p<0.001) with the same odds ratio (0.13) for all three types of study design.

So three studies found a significantly reduced risk of UTI. Your reading the authors conclusions. Which I failed to read, because I didn't think it mattered to you what an australian blogger thought. But I guess you'll except anything that agrees with you at this point.

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

a babies dick

You realize the common age of UTI's is 3-7 right? So apparently you're not a child molester, you just don't understand UTI's. And let's not forget that you called circumcision sexual assault.

reduce sexual pleasure

Nope we've covered this several times. That's not true and you know it.

And so will you, so what?

The difference is my material is an international peer reviewed paper which refutes your point that circumcisions don't prevent disease. Your's is a blogger. So now lets try this again.

Circumcision has medical benefits, that's irrefutable at this point. It also doesn't have any of the side effects you keep claiming, which I've backed up with more studies. So what argument are you left with? The only thing you have at this point is your phrasing of the procedure based on a misunderstanding of medicine. What else do you have besides fear mongering?

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond0 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]unbannable9412 25 points26 points27 points 12 years ago (31 children) | Copy Link

Saying circumcision counts as genital mutilation is an insult to anyone who has actually suffered genetal mutilation.

It is genital mutilation, the insult here is your minimizing MGM while exaggerating FGM.

It's unethical, unnecessary, damaging, barbaric, and a violation of a person's basic human rights to bodily integrity, I don't give a shit if FGM is commonly defined as the genital disemboweling of new born girls, circumcision is GENITAL MUTILATION, the fucking end.

I'm getting pretty tired of the circumcision hate

I'm pretty fucking tired of assholes like you minimizing MGM as an issue because you so desperately need to deify female victimization and ensure women win gold in the oppression Olympics.

Circumcision by a medical professional is not genetal mutilation.

It is, it's also malpractice and a violation of the Oath western doctors take.

Go fuck yourself.

[+]raesmond -30 points-29 points-28 points 12 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]unbannable9412 14 points15 points16 points 12 years ago* (29 children) | Copy Link

I didn't do that. I minimized circumcision and exaggerating actual genital mutilation. I didn't mention gender at all.

Blah blah bullshit.

Circumcision is genital mutilation, deal with it.

And it is absolutely helpful[1] . It's actually recommended.

It's also discouraged by other medical organizations, either way it doesn't fucking matter if MGM makes men ejaculate flower scented liquid gold cum that cures cancer, it IS NOT FUCKING WARRANTED.

There's these things called basic human rights, you oughta read up on them dipshit.

But just for funzies.

I found evidence that FGM has "medical benefits".

http://www.tzonline.org/pdf/femalecircumcisionandhivinfectionintanzania.pdf

http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1113&context=iph_theses

Guess we need to start cutting all those girls that got past us when they were born that are in there teens, and don't forget the new born girls too!

GET CUTTING!!

It's a medical procedure, and you're insane.

You know, like a lobotomy.

[+]raesmond -24 points-23 points-22 points 12 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–]unbannable9412 16 points17 points18 points 12 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

2012 SWEDISH PAEDIATRIC SOCIETY

Circumcision of young boys for religious and non-medical reasons ought to be banned in Sweden. "We consider it to be an assault on these boys," said Staffan Janson, chairman of the committee for ethical issues and childrens' rights. Children are unable to form a decision in the matter. Circumcision is an attack on boys' integrity. "It's such a complicated and difficult question, but even so, we've decided that this is a procedure to be done away with," Janson said."It's a mutilation of a child unable to decide for himself."

2010 ROYAL AUSTRALASIAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS

"Ethical and human rights concerns have been raised regarding elective infant male circumcision because it is recognized that the foreskin has a functional role, the operation is non-therapeutic and the infant is unable to consent. After reviewing the currently available evidence, the RACP believes that the frequency of diseases modifiable by circumcision, the level of protection offered by circumcision and the complication rates of circumcision do not warrant routine infant circumcision in Australia and New Zealand." "The foreskin has two main functions. Firstly it exists to protect the glans penis. Secondly the foreskin is a primary sensory part of the penis, containing some of the most sensitive areas of the penis." "The potential harms include contravention of individual rights, loss of choice, loss of function, procedural and psychological complications. . . . A boy circumcised as an infant may deeply resent this when he grows older; he may want what he cannot have – not to have been circumcised. . . . The option of leaving circumcision until later, when the boy is old enough to make a decision for himself does need to be raised with parents and considered. . . . The ethical merit of this option is that it seeks to respect the child’s physical integrity, and capacity for autonomy by leaving the options open for him to make his own autonomous choice in the future."

2010 ROYAL DUTCH MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

"There is no convincing evidence that circumcision is useful or necessary in terms of prevention or hygiene. Partly in light of the complications which can arise during or after circumcision, circumcision is not justifiable except on medical/therapeutic grounds. . . . Contrary to what is often thought, circumcision entails the risk of medical and psychological complications. . . . Non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors is contrary to the rule that minors may only be exposed to medical treatments if illness or abnormalities are present. . . . Non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors conflicts with the child's right to autonomy and physical integrity. . . . Complications in the area of sexuality have also been reported as have extreme pain experiences in newborns causing behavioral changes which are still apparent years later. Similarly, the high social costs of circumcision as a result of complications have been cited. . . . The foreskin is a complex, erotogenic structure that plays an important role in the mechanical function of the penis during sexual acts, such as penetrative intercourse and masturbation. The many attempts by men to restore their foreskins by mechanical or surgical means also contradict the idea that the foreskin is a useless part of the body."

2008 DOCTORS OPPOSING CIRCUMCISION

"We recommend that the genital integrity of boys be preserved. Parental request for non-therapeutic circumcision of a son appears to exceed the powers granted to parents by law. We further recommend that doctors refuse to perform non-therapeutic circumcision at parental request."

2006 BRITISH MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

“The BMA does not believe that parental preference alone constitutes sufficient grounds for performing a surgical procedure on a child unable to express his own view. Parental preference must be weighed in terms of the child's interests. . . . The BMA considers that the evidence concerning health benefit from non-therapeutic circumcision is insufficient for this alone to be a justification for doing it. . . . Some doctors may wish to not perform circumcisions for reasons of conscience. Doctors are under no obligation to comply with a request to circumcise a child.”

2002 CANADIAN PAEDIATRIC SOCIETY (REAFFIRMED 1996 POSITION)

“Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed.”

The British Medical Journal (BMJ) is published by the British Medical Association (BMA). Editorials in the BMJ are considered to represent the policy of the BMA. The BMJ has published two editorials on male child circumcision.

The first editorial (1979) took a position against non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision of boys.

The case against circumcision. BMJ 1979; 6172: 1163-1164. The second editorial (1993) took a position against post-neonatal circumcision of boys.

Gordon A, Collin J. Saving the normal foreskin. BMJ 1993; 306: 1-2.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued a brief statement within its 1971 hospital care manual. An ad hoc committee issued a longer statement in 1975. More information was contained in the 1978 hospital care manual. A supplement to the 1975 statement was issued in 1989 by a task force assembled for that purpose. This 1989 supplement recognized the pain of neonatal circumcision for the first time. The 1989 statement reaffirmed the previous position that there is no medical indication for neonatal circumcision and reported new information on the role of the HPV virus in cervical cancer. The 1997 statement emphasized the elective nature of child circumcision. The Circumcision Reference Library has combined these statements into one file. The AAP statements dated prior to 1999 have been superseded by the 1999 policy statement. The 1999 policy statement has its own file.

American Academy of Pediatrics (1971, 1975, 1977, 1989, 1997)

The current policy statement of the AAP is the 1999 Circumcision Policy Statement. The AAP does not recommend routine (performed in the absence of medical indication) circumcision of the newborn. The statement emphasizes the need for well-informed consent of the parents (plural).

American Academy of Pediatrics. Circumcision Policy Statement (1999) Pediatrics 1999;103(3):686-93

The Central Union for Child Welfare (Lastensuojelun Keskusliitto) has issued a strong statement in opposition to the proposal to offer ritual circumcision in public hospitals.

[Position Statement on the Circumcision of Boys](http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/finland2003/\). Helsinki: Central Union for Child Welfare. 25 August 2003.

All of the medical opinion on the issue is a detail, an aside.

Human beings have basic immutable rights, bodily integrity is recognized to be one of them, if you are against FGM, you cannot support MGM without being a hypocrite.

Get this through your thick fucking skull, and quit dodging this point, MGM is a violation of a person's basic human rights, encouraged by a society that profits from the unconsented mutilation of the genitals of young and new born boys.

Eat shit and fucking choke you sub human piece of fucking scum.

[–]OmegaDN-13 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Workchoices8 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]johnmarkley5 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TheEquivocator-1 point 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-18 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]7 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-13 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]10 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]unbannable941210 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-2 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]unbannable94123 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]raesmond-4 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]unbannable94123 points 12 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AlphaWookie 13 points14 points15 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]raesmond -15 points-14 points-13 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Vaphell 11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

According to a systematic and critical review of the scientific literature, the health benefits of circumcision include lower risks of acquiring HIV, genital herpes, human papilloma virus and syphilis. Circumcision also lowers the risk of penile cancer over a lifetime; reduces the risk of cervical cancer in sexual partners, and lowers the risk of urinary tract infections in the first year of life.

Are you telling me that the infant sticks his dick in everything and is at risk of HIV, genital herpes, human papilloma virus and syphilis? Cervical cancer in sexual partners? Come the fuck on. It's all immaterial because it's a child we are talking about here. The only thing that holds any water here is UTI in the first year of life, but the circumcision comes with its own set of possible complications so it's a draw at best.

We don't remove appendix right off the bat even though it would reduce the risk of inflammation "over a lifetime".

[–]AlphaWookie 12 points13 points14 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+]raesmond -17 points-16 points-15 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AlphaWookie 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]unbannable9412 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ImNotIntoPokemon 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]raesmond -8 points-7 points-6 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ImNotIntoPokemon 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mirazatha 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Armageist 10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D82 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]raesmond -14 points-13 points-12 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]geoboy1234 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ShaidarHaran2[S] 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crimson_D82 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]raesmond -26 points-25 points-24 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ShaidarHaran2[S] 16 points17 points18 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]raesmond -17 points-16 points-15 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Eryemil 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]jeepdave -19 points-18 points-17 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	"I laughed when I heard him scream"
Author	ShaidarHaran2
Upvotes	118
Comments	287
Date	April 1, 2014 4:56 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/21xqk8/i_laughed_when_i_heard_him_scream/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/i-laughed-when-i-heard-him-scream.1002128 https://theredarchive.com/post/1002128

Comments