TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • Other

      • /r/AllPillDebate
      • /r/AlreadyRed
      • /r/altTRP
      • /r/AntiFeminists
      • /r/askFDS
      • /r/askMRP
      • /r/askRPC
      • /r/becomeaman
      • /r/BlackPillScience
      • /r/Chadfish
      • /r/Divorce_Men
      • /r/EverydayMisandry
      • /r/ExRedPill
      • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
      • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
      • /r/GEOTRP
      • /r/MalePsychology
      • /r/Male_Studies
      • /r/MenSupportMen
      • /r/MGTOW2
      • /r/MuslimRedPill
      • /r/newTRP
      • /r/PussyPass
      • /r/PussyPassDenied
      • /r/RedPillBooks
      • /r/RedPillParenting
      • /r/RedPillWives
      • /r/RedPillWomen
      • /r/RedPillWorkplace
      • /r/RPChristians
      • /r/ThankTRP
      • /r/TheRedPillStories
      • /r/trpGAME
      • /r/TRPOffTopic
      • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
      • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • A Voice for Men
    • Dalrock
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Heartiste
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • Return of Kings
    • The Power Moves
    • The Rational Male
    • The Spearhead
    • Other

      • Alpha Game
      • Archwinger
      • Artful Prudence
      • Black Label Logic
      • Caleb Jones
      • Captain Capitalism
      • Corporate Machiavelli
      • Days of Game
      • Deep Strength
      • Dicipres
      • Donal Graeme
      • Female Misogynist
      • Free Northerner
      • Gaming My Wife
      • Hawaiian Libertarian
      • Illimitable Men
      • In Mala Fide
      • Kill Your Inner Loser
      • KillToParty
      • Krauser PUA
      • LaidNYC
      • NO MA'AM
      • Omega Virgin Revolt
      • Pook's Mill
      • Random Xpat Rantings
      • Red Pill Theory
      • Red Pill Wifery
      • RedPillDad
      • RedPillDoctor
      • Rian Stone
      • RooshV
      • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
      • Sigma Frame
      • The Feminine Woman
      • The Futurist
      • The Masculine Principle
      • The Modern Man
      • The New Modern Man
      • The Obsidian Files
      • The Private Man
      • The Red Pill Room
      • The Red Quest
      • The Rules Revisited
      • Troy Francis
      • Wintery Knight
      • Woujo
      • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Support

Male genital mutilation (circumcision) in developing countries CAUSED BY WESTERN INVOLVEMENT including UN, WHO, and UNICEF - whose male genital mutilation promotion policies has led to men being kidnapped and forcibily circumcised and uncircumcised men being refused UN food vouchers, vaccines, etc

mhelena9201

November 10, 2020
2550 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://www.wokefather.com/body/forced-circumcision-wheres-the-outrage-over-male-genital-mutilation/
Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB
Support the archive

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

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

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

Support the archive

Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Male genital mutilation (circumcision) in developing countries CAUSED BY WESTERN INVOLVEMENT including UN, WHO, and UNICEF - whose male genital mutilation promotion policies has led to men being kidnapped and forcibily circumcised and uncircumcised men being refused UN food vouchers, vaccines, etc
Author

mhelena9201

Upvotes 2550
Comments 261
Date November 10, 2020 10:18 AM UTC
(5 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/jrikwv/male_genital_mutilation_circumcision_in/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/male-genital-mutilation-circumcision-in-developing.841027
https://theredarchive.com/post/841027
Top posts by mhelena9201

"Hollywood still doesn't care that Amber Heard is an abuser": Two articles about Johnny Depp/ Amber Heard - but that also talk about the wider issue of domestic violence and the gender idealogues who contribute to this mess

2336 upvotes
November 11, 2020
/r/MensRights

Woman who glued her vagina as part of bizarre bid to frame her ex-boyfriend for rape and kidnap is jailed for ten years

1401 upvotes
November 12, 2020
/r/PussyPassDenied

US government passes Commission on the Social Status of Black Men and Boys Act (This is great but hopefully its not full of "woke" or feminist crap "yeah black men these problems you have, you know what the soloution is? Feminism" crap

425 upvotes
November 15, 2020
/r/MensRights

Despite the below stats the USA (like >>98%

414 upvotes
November 12, 2020
/r/MensRights

(NOTE THE PIC IS NOT ABOUT THIS POST) How to debunk feminists: 1. Find the source they cite 2. Read them the source... simple example that exposes all feminism

249 upvotes
April 22, 2020
/r/MensRights

"Trickle down" equality is the problem of how feminist frame mens issues as really being about/ caused by sexism against women... Also some great/funny examples of what it would look like if MRAs acted like feminsts & did this this about womens issues really being about/ caused by sexism against men

167 upvotes
November 11, 2020
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Groundbreaking Healthy Dads Project To Expand In 2019 in Australia (Great idea, we need more projects like this all around the world) (Also check out news section of this mens health website, its a great approach to mens rights issues i.e. none of that blame patriarchy, we need feminism propaganda)

136 upvotes
November 10, 2020
/r/MensRights

[Article from a teacher]: Teachers, You Are Biased Against Boys [and failing them badly] ]and Need to Change [Includes studies, stats, and good action points to solve the issue]

122 upvotes
November 10, 2020
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]somerandomuser295 302 points303 points304 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

WHAT

[–]SelkoBrother 119 points120 points121 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Same reaction. Sounds impossible and made up, but here we are

[–]show-up 166 points167 points168 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Foreskin for Food.

[–]Susmarshmallow 60 points61 points62 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fuck you

[–]Astrum91 34 points35 points36 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

My thoughts exactly. It's like the disgusting act of checking if women are virgins by forcefully inspecting them for a hymen, but now applied to men and their foreskin.

[–]StrokeMyAxe 17 points18 points19 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No. It’s like forcible breaking their Hymen if they are virgins. So... rape.

[–]Littledudeontheblock 11 points12 points13 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wait that’s a thing?!?!? Fuck man

[–]Dickless_50s_Boy 246 points247 points248 points 5 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

Holy shit FUCK the UN. For this and the China thing.

[–]UncivilPizza 43 points44 points45 points 5 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

What happened in China?

[–]Impractical0 104 points105 points106 points 5 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

The mass amounts of enslavement of immigrants equal to when Hitler began his concentration camps. The only reason the UN refuses to do anything is because the threat of another World War happening would be inevitable, as most other WW began with conflicts with other Super Power Countries.

[–]UncivilPizza 44 points45 points46 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Isn't that essentially why countries refused to get involved with Hitler until France was invaded? If I didn't know any better I might say that world leaders only prevent atrocities when their allies or interests are going to be affected...

[–]Impractical0 25 points26 points27 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes. If the interests of one country begin to infringe the rights of another, that's when the United Nations can intervene. The United Nations have no power over a countries rule over there own, as that defies what the country itself signed up for. The UN's hands are tied sadly, as if they do intervene, it would bring about the deaths of more lives than what's in those camps with another World War.

[–]cailedoll 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If I’m correct both England and France had a pact with Poland so once Poland was invaded they were obligated to intervene. EDIT- Both countries declared war on Germany after Poland was invaded, but no one really did anything until spring 1940 when the Battle of France started

[–]horonlapsi 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah but these same fuckers didnt do shit when the soviet union invaded poland from the other side

[–]davidboi1324 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That actually makes lots of sense

[–]Walshy231231 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Because appeasement worked so well last time

[–]Impractical0 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Better than to bring the world into another rather simplistic conflict, in a sense that the US could wip China back in line if it chose to do so.

[–]horonlapsi 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Yeah lets wait couple of years until china is as strong as nato and then lets have ww3

[–]Impractical0 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Do you have another idea that doesnt end in barging into Chinese territory and causing another war?

[–]horonlapsi 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Apeasment worked last time lets do that again /s

[–]bog_deavil13 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They also gave away the names of the people who approached UN from those concentration camps for help, back to Chinese government.

[–]wegwerpacc123 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Uyghurs are not immigrants lol, they are the indigenous people of xinjiang.

[–]Impractical0 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I heard they were immigrants originally. Either way, people are being held captive, and the world refuses to help them. It doesnt matter who is doing the wrong, or those suffering from that wrong, people suffer in the end.

[–]18Apollo18 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

How about the fact that this is literally happening in the US as well?

[–]18Apollo18 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The mass amounts of enslavement of immigrants equal to when Hitler

Yet the same thing is happening in the US and no one is batting an eye

[–]Kut_Throat1125 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Don’t forget the UN child sex abuse!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse_by_UN_peacekeepers

[–]wikipedia_text_bot 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Child sexual abuse by UN peacekeepers

An Associated Press (AP) investigation revealed in 2017 that more than 100 United Nations (UN) peacekeepers ran a child sex ring in Haiti over a 10-year period and none were ever jailed. The report further found that over the previous 12 years there had been almost 2,000 allegations of sexual abuse and exploitation by peacekeepers and other UN personnel around the world. AP found the abuse to be much greater than originally thought. After the AP report, U.S.

About Me - Opt out

[–]Naru4odo 139 points140 points141 points 5 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

Isn't the male foreskin used in a multimillion dollar beauty industry...

https://www.mommyish.com/foreskin-skin-cream/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-cut-above-the-rest-wrin/ https://thetyee.ca/Views/2007/01/30/Foreskin/

The more you know, this is why it's pushed how it is and isn't deemed "horrific". The male foreskin is the active ingredient in these "regenerative youth" creams, specifically baby foreskins.

[–]hottama 112 points113 points114 points 5 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

A couple of years ago Sandra Bullock was on Ellen laughing about how she had just had a baby foreskin treatment in South Korea. A truly comedic moment.

[–]entrep4 95 points96 points97 points 5 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Imagine the outrage if a male celebrity said he'd had a treatment made with parts of girls bodies's taken in an FGM procedure.

[–]adminnoob258 47 points48 points49 points 5 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

your telling me you've never used clit cream? it makes you glow fam! /s

[–]Kut_Throat1125 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hey Gwyneth Paltrow, get outta here.

[+]Swade211 -43 points-42 points-41 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I agree this is wrong, but it really seems disingenuous to me to equate foreskin circumcision to FGM.

[–]Cantersoft 32 points33 points34 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Child rape = child rape. No gender distinguishment required.

[–]entrep4 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What does that have to do with the topic being discussed??

[+]Swade211 -36 points-35 points-34 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

And you have lost me, and probably a good portion of society.

Good luck with that

[–]XSasuken22X[🍰] 19 points20 points21 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

This dude just said that child rape is different pending on the genders.

[+]Swade211 -22 points-21 points-20 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I thought he was calling circumcision child rape.

Obviously actual child rape is horrible in any situation.

You people are delusional

[–]XSasuken22X[🍰] 15 points16 points17 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

No, you obviously lack reading comprehension skills.

[–]Swade211 -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why the fuck is child rape even mentioned then. I guess I expected too much by thinking a reply would be coherent and relevant to the discussion.

[–]Long-Chair-7825 14 points15 points16 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's pretty much identical to type 1a, based on this

[–]auMatech 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Ah yes, laughing about the "penis facial" after downplaying the severity of all the foreskins only coming from "children far away"...

[–]hottama 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's alright if it's boys anyway.

[–]Jordan_is_tired 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Jesus, that’s fucked.

[+]lizzyb1871 points 5 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

This kind of shit makes me so ashamed of my gender

[–]hottama 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You didn't do it personally. There's no reason to collectivize ourselves around gender.

[–]boxsterguy 25 points26 points27 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And this is why the AAP still recommends that insurance pay for male genital mutilation. It's a cheap and easy surgery that nets ~$400 up front for the doctor (most complications don't show up until years later, when it's found that the mutilation took too much skin, caused skin bridges and other adhesions, erectile dysfunction, etc), and a huge backend selling the "waste" to cosmetics and stem cell research.

[–]contraterrene 144 points145 points146 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is beyond vile.

Little boys need to have their genitals safe from pointless mutilation.

[–][deleted] 49 points50 points51 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What the actual fuck!!??!?

No circumcision, no food??!?

[–]GltyUntlPrvnInncnt 40 points41 points42 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fuck genital mutilation and fuck any organisation that condones baby boys being mutilated.

[–]DarthEquus 64 points65 points66 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

r/Intactivism

[–]Davediedyeasterday 16 points17 points18 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Most activist groups rn

[–]ProtectIntegrity 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

What do you mean?

[–]BleedinSkull 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Modern feminism often is misandrist and use vile sexist phrases like "kill all men". Most disregard issues relating to males, like in this scenario, male genital mutilation which is normalized compared to female genital mutilation which is widely rejected and appalled by feminists.

BLM damaged the black community further and did nothing to relieve the poorly trained United States police forces. They only increase the need for policing because they're causing property and city damages, stealing from businesses and vandalizing them, violence and murder of a few select children.

SJWs/PC complains about culture appropriation, yet a bunch of pasty white college students hates that there's gendered roots in latin language. For example, instead of latino or latina, they strongly oblige to use the imaginary gender neutral version "latinx" which is very difficult for someone of latin american descent to pronounce. In fact, many of the Latin American community heavily rejects the word "Latinx" and do not like using it.

These are just few of many examples, hypocritism is a very common theme among them.

[–]Davediedyeasterday 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah pretty much sums up 2020

[–]omegaphallic 28 points29 points30 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There needs to be an investiagation and serious consquences for the guilty.

[–]djc_tech 25 points26 points27 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Males are expendable. When are you going to realize this? Remember during the Obama administration when everyone was screaming and crying over the girls kidnapped by the Boko Haram? A travesty sure...but do you also remember anyone shedding a tear when the Boko Haram didn’t kidnap little boys because they just basically mutilated and executed them? Nope you don’t because no one cared.

Why do you think anyone will care about this? They won’t.

[–]mhelena9201[S] 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://youtu.be/cHhVyeHRxWk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pz_Y7XVWIw

[–]Greg_W_Allan 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/happened-10000-boys-kidnapped-boko-haram

[–]adminnoob258 22 points23 points24 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

So when you go pick up food from the UN with vouchers they say "drop your pants we gotta check..?"

[–]Bad_Routes 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Stop making me laugh at my job

[–]mhelena9201[S] 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

lol no, UN and WHO are linking giving money and food aid and medicine to circumcision uptake in areas. Areas where they are refusing circumcision or is low are not getting food aid. As a result, these mobs are going around cutting men

[–]Geniusboy3 43 points44 points45 points 5 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

How can you tell if you are circumsized?

[–]iswagpack 53 points54 points55 points 5 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

There is a layer of skin around the tip. Like a turtle neck/sleeve

[–]Geniusboy3 28 points29 points30 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Is there some public use image you can send me? I just want to make sure I interpreted that correctly.

[–]iswagpack 49 points50 points51 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Nah, you can do that.

T shirt = circumcised

Turtle neck shirt with the collar pulled up over your head is uncircumcised

[–]Geniusboy3 43 points44 points45 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

CURSE YOU WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[–]cikifrombosnia 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bless your soul, please watch this

[–]Geniusboy3 14 points15 points16 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why did I get so many upvotes? 😆

[–]MarsNirgal 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Guys, I think this person is requesting dick pics.

[–]Geniusboy3 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, but I looked up a diagram, assuming that I interpreted it correctly, I was already circumsized.

[–]adminnoob258 17 points18 points19 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

does your dick look like a mushroom?

[–]Geniusboy3 13 points14 points15 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Yes, but why do I have so many upvotes on my comments?

[–]adminnoob258 15 points16 points17 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

did you have to pull skin back to see the mushroom?

IF yes your not circumcized

IF no you are circumcized

[–]Geniusboy3 17 points18 points19 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I am already aware of being circumsized, for about 2 hours now, but why so many upvotes?

[–]chaun2 23 points24 points25 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I can't speak for everyone, but there seems to be a high percentage of this sub that appreciates someone making the effort to educate themselves about things

[–]jinladen040 18 points19 points20 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I feel like if this were a Change.Org Petition it may actually take off outside of the MRA communities because its just so outlandish.

But then again, youre always going to have those large groups of women that advocate for circumcisuon on grounds of Asthetics alone and feel that is justification enough and also argue that it isnt the same as FGM. And i wouldnt doubt a lot of those women are behind these programs.

[–]mhelena9201[S] 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The intactivist community is very succesful and also generally good vibes good people, see them online e.g. bloodstained men. Excellent support by men and women from all backgrounds. Some really dedicated indiiduals going all out full time too.

[–]sw00pieswoopswoo 15 points16 points17 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The word uncircumcised is ridiculous, like unsweetened tea. No one is born with a cut penis and the skin goes back on if you choose to stay uncircumcised. Stupid.

[–]Evilcon21 11 points12 points13 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That’s just vile. I’m lost for what to say next. They should have been taking care of the people not to destroy their genitals under any circumstances.

[–]kolyu7771 29 points30 points31 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You know that you are doing a terrible job when the people who say "I could do a better job" are actually right. And in this case they are absolutely right.

[–]WhatRemainsAfter 12 points13 points14 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What the fuck?!

[–]ctwise12 19 points20 points21 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I don’t know why the 60% keeps getting thrown around and not the numbers from which they come.

Sure, the risk of contracting HIV really does drop 60%.

IT DROPS FROM 3% ACTUAL RISK TO 1.3% ACTUAL RISK

So, that being said, lemme just cut off your left foot. Don’t worry, you’ll still be able to walk, just a little different. You won’t lose any sensitivity in your leg and it’ll work just fine! I just don’t want you to get cancer there, so I’m just being extra cautious. And you have my word that I won’t sell that foot on the black market

(☞ ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)☞

Just want to add, if circumcision is so effective, how come countries that don’t practice routine circumcision don’t have HIV blasting out the sides? Hmmm guess it doesn’t matter too much, just keep cutting; I’ve got rent coming up and that baby’s paying for it hahaha!

[–]miroku000 13 points14 points15 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It seems likely that circumcision doesn't decrease the risk of aids. Instead, kids who are circumcised are more likely to be from families that instill in them values that lead to less sexual promiscuity.

[–]were_gonna_make_it 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Even those numbers are flawed because those studies did not use proper controls. For example, they started to track the participants as soon as they were circumcised. So the circumcised group had a period of several weeks, while they were healing, when they couldnt have sex. Also they taught the circumcised groups how to use condoms, but not the uncut group. Basically, those numbers are meaningless.

[–]disenchantedprincess 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Could it be that it decreases risk because mutilated men are more likely to wear a condom because they don't have foreskin to help them glide smoothly.

[–]tabris51 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What the fuck

[–]AppalachianSasquatch 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why the fuck are people so obsessed with little boy dicks, just leave em alone.

[–]daten-shi 13 points14 points15 points 5 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Can blame that on the Americans as they’re like the only western country that actually circumcises guys for non-medical (and non-religious) reasons and then get defensive when you tell them they’ve been mutilated without their consent at birth.

Edit: Uhh

[–]Long-Chair-7825 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

What about it? u/darthequus invites people who seem interested in intactivism to the sub.

[–]daten-shi 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Seemed like it was some sort of jab at me for my comment as I thought it said inactivistm instead of intactivism lol.

[–]Long-Chair-7825 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ok...

[–]Tuguy420 59 points60 points61 points 5 years ago (70 children) | Copy Link

Why/how is circumsicion bad? I feel like that's a dumb question, but I honestly dont know since I've been cut my whole life

[–]agdzietam 97 points98 points99 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You shouldn't be downvoted for asking a genuine question, people are assholes. Refer to the faq for a general answer and a lot of links:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/wiki/faq?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=MensRights&utm_content=t5_2qhk3#wiki_3._why_is_circumcision.2Fmale_genital_mutilation_such_a_big_issue.3F

[–]frenchmengonnakil 73 points74 points75 points 5 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

Its bad because it removes a usefull part of the body, often by force, most of the time only for religious reasons.

[–]RavynArcadia 31 points32 points33 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I’m still annoyed I had no say in getting mine removed. I would not have chosen it.

[–]LadyKnight151 41 points42 points43 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Most of those religious reasons, in the case of Christians, is completely misguided since the New Testament explicitly says not to circumcise

[–]frenchmengonnakil 33 points34 points35 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Most of circumcisions are done by muslims and jews.

[–]DarthEquus 50 points51 points52 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yep. Muslims, Jews, and Americans

[–]LadyKnight151 35 points36 points37 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Americans do a significant number as well and they were initially misled by false teaching from "Christians" who obviously never actually read the bible

[–]EnoughNoLibsSpam 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Verse?

[–]DarthEquus 21 points22 points23 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In the New Testament, there are a bunch.

Also, for Roman Catholics, there is a papal bull that expressly forbids circumcision.

[–]LadyKnight151 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Romans 2:26‭-‬29 NIV

So then, if those who are not circumcised keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker. A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.

Romans 3:29‭-‬30 NIV

Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.

1 Corinthians 7:17‭-‬19 NIV

Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God’s commands is what counts.

Galatians 5:1‭-‬6 NIV

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery. Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. For through the Spirit we eagerly await by faith the righteousness for which we hope. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

Galatians 6:11‭-‬13 NIV

See what large letters I use as I write to you with my own hand! Those who want to impress people by means of the flesh are trying to compel you to be circumcised. The only reason they do this is to avoid being persecuted for the cross of Christ. Not even those who are circumcised keep the law, yet they want you to be circumcised that they may boast about your circumcision in the flesh.

Ephesians 2:11‭-‬16 NIV

Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (which is done in the body by human hands)— remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.

Philippians 3:2‭-‬3 NIV

Watch out for those dogs, those evildoers, those mutilators of the flesh. For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh—

Titus 1:10‭-‬11 NIV

For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group. They must be silenced, because they are disrupting whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach—and that for the sake of dishonest gain.

[–]TheSleeplessEyes 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The sects born from American Christianity really are something else.

[–]mapplemobs 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. Circumcision is Satanic by definition. Besides, the circumcisions performed in the Bible were what the Jews used to do, the Brit Milah. It eventually became the Brit Periah, since circumcision was seen as "Holy" and so more circumcision must have been even more "Holy." Also with the added "benefit" of it preventing masturbation if enough skin was removed.

[–]sw00pieswoopswoo 12 points13 points14 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not just religion. US doctors and hospitals pushed for it so they could get extra money. It was sold as a cleanliness factor to the non-religious.

[+]Tuguy420 -10 points-9 points-8 points 5 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

What is the purpose of a foreskin bro

[–]DarthEquus 49 points50 points51 points 5 years ago* (17 children) | Copy Link

1) Protects the infant from contaminants, infection, and meatal stenosis.

The foreskin is fused to the head of the penis in infancy[1], providing protection. The preputial sphincter at the tip specifically serves as a simple barrier that keeps out environmental contamination. It is not designed to be pulled back in infancy or childhood. Meatal stenosis (narrowing or closing of the urethral hole) occurs in approximately 10% of circumcised boys[2] and sometimes requires painful corrective surgery.

2) Protects the adult glans from chafing and loss of feeling.

When the mucosa of the glans are exposed to chafing, the glans protects itself by keratinizing[3] (similar to a callous). Foreskin keeps the glans internal, as it is supposed to be. The more the glans keratinizes, the less it can feel.[4]

3) Stores and releases natural lubricants.

With natural lubricant,[5] men with foreskin generally do not need lotion or lubricant for sexual activity. Women benefit from the lower risk of friction and dryness that a man's foreskin provides. It also serves to seal in the female sexual partner’s lubrication, preventing it from losing its effectiveness.[6]

4) Feels good for its owner with specialized pleasure nerves.

The foreskin is densely innervated with multiple types of nerves.[7] These nerves respond to stretch, fine touch detail, temperature, and more. Foreskin feels really good.

5) Delivers pleasure to the male's partner.

The presence of the male foreskin is inherently pleasurable in intercourse. In particular, it stimulates the female clitoris in certain sexual positions.

6) Rolls/glides rather than rubs. This helps prevent friction and dryness, eases penetration, and provides pleasure.

The mechanics of sexual activity are changed dramatically with circumcision, from rolling to rubbing. Circumcised males "tend to thrust harder and deeper, using elongated strokes," but intact males tend "to thrust more gently, to have shorter strokes, and tended to be in contact with the mons pubis and clitoris more."[6] Also, the sliding/gliding motion of the foreskin over the glans and corona is deeply pleasurable for the male and makes initial insertion of the penis easier and more comfortable for both partners.

7) Keeps the head of the penis warm, moist, and comfortable.

Like the eyeball, inside of the cheek, and vagina, the glans is designed to be a protected internal organ.[3]

8) Provides sensory feedback, giving the man greater control of the sexual experience.

The structures of the foreskin provide full, natural levels of neurological feedback, which allow robust control over erection, arousal, and orgasm.

9) Facilitates erection and ejaculation when wanted.

The foreskin contains the most pleasurable parts of the penis. This complete sensation, elimination of friction and pain, and other functions reduce the risk of erectile and ejaculatory problems.[8]

10) Helps prevent erection and ejaculation when unwanted.

The foreskin protects the glans from being aroused at inappropriate times, reducing involuntary erections. Feedback helps prevent premature ejaculation.

11) Maximizes penile length and thickness.

It's common sense: if you cut part of something off, you make it smaller. This has been observed by professional journals, including one which found that the penises of circumcised males were an average of almost 1 centimeter shorter.[9]

12) Feels details as well as the fingertips can.

The specialized nerves don't just feel good - they feel well.[7]

13) Increases sexual arousal.

Apocrine glands in the foreskin[10] may release pheromones, signal chemicals that help encourage sexual arousal in the man's partner. The foreskin also prevents discoloration of the red/purple/pink head of the penis, preserving the sexual signal conveyed by this natural coloration.

14) Defends against harmful germs.

Specialized cells provide defense against unhealthy microbes.[10] As long as the man washes occasionally with water, not soap, the microbial balance of the area remains healthy and infections are prevented.

15) Prevents painful erections.

An intact man is safe from "not enough skin" erection problems.[11] The foreskin is a part of a whole penile skin system – it expands and moves along with erection. In addition, the frenar band massages the glans during sliding/gliding, regulating blood flow and preventing the erection from becoming "too hard," which can happen with some men.

16) Prevents pain after orgasm.

Without correct protection and mechanical function, some men experience a burning or other pain after ejaculation.[12]

[–]Tuguy420 29 points30 points31 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Damn man seems like I'm missing out

[+]bubbawears -25 points-24 points-23 points 5 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

Bro half of this is bullshit you guys are different 😂

SUBSCRIBE

Circumcision



Medically reviewed by Karen Gill, M.D. — Written by Brian Krans — Updated on September 17, 2018

Pros and cons

Preparation

Procedure

Follow-up

powered by Rubicon Project

What is circumcision? Circumcision is the surgical removal of the foreskin, which is the skin covering the tip of the penis. It’s common in the United States and parts of Africa and the Middle East but less common in Europe and some countries, according to recent estimatesTrusted Source. The procedure is typically done on a newborn for personal or religious reasons. Circumcision in older children and adults may also be done for the same reasons. Additionally, older children or adults may need circumcision to treat several conditions, including:

balanitis (swelling of the foreskin)

balanoposthitis (inflammation of the tip and foreskin of the penis)

paraphimosis (inability to return a retracted foreskin to its original position)

phimosis (inability to retract the foreskin)

In healthy newborns, there is no medical need for circumcision. However, families may choose to have their sons circumcised for a number of reasons. One of the most common reasons is religious tradition. The religious laws of both Judaism and Islam require that newborn boys be circumcised. Other reasons to circumcise include:

personal choice

aesthetic preference

resulting lowered risk of some conditions

desire of some fathers to have their sons look like them

In Judaism, the ritual circumcision is called a brit milah and is typically performed as part of a religious ceremony at home or in a synagogue, although it is sometimes performed in a hospital. It is performed by a mohel, who has received religious and surgical training to perform ritual circumcision. The procedure is almost always done when the baby boy is eight days old. In Islamic culture, the ritual circumcision is called khitan. In some parts of the Islamic world, the procedure is performed as part of a religious ceremony. In other parts, it’s done in a hospital setting. In most Islamic countries, the khitan is performed in infancy, but it may be done when a boy enters puberty.

Pros and cons of circumcision

There are health-related reasons to circumcise newborn males. Most of them aren’t factors until young adulthood, however. Circumcision is a decision best left to parents or to the child himself when he is older. Doctors can help parents better understand the benefits and risks. Despite rumors to the contrary, circumcision has no effect on a man’s fertility, and there are mixed results from the few studies on how circumcision affects sexual pleasure. SomeTrusted Source found no effect, while othersTrusted Source found increased sensitivity. Here are some of the pros and cons of male circumcision.

Pros of circumcision

decreases risk of urinary tract infections in infancy

likely decreases riskTrusted Source of penile cancer, though this cancer is rare and becoming rarer for reasons that appear to be unrelated to circumcision

decreases risk of sexually transmitted diseases, including female-to-male transmission of HIV

decreases risk of cervical cancer and some infections in female partners

prevents balanitis, balanoposthitis, paraphimosis, and phimosis

makes it easier to maintain good genital hygiene

We can do this all day i don't care if you want circumcision or not i have one and never had problems nor any of the girls I was with. I just said it's nothing bad if it is voluntary and the person gives consent. I'm going to leave this incel circle jerk now.

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

Oh look, another triggered circumcised American. You guys never cease to crack me up. I don't throw around the teem "fragile male ego" often, but your reaction (along with all the other circumcised NPCs) fits the bill perfectly. You take criticism of the practice as a personal insult, can't handle the imagined indirect criticism to your pp, and fall into total cognitive dissonance as you desperately try and justify this to yourself.

And on top of all that, in a community that advocates for men's rights, you proceed to defend the continued sexual torture and disfigurement of helpless boys so you feel better about your little pecker.

Truly pathetic

Oh, and btw, the "health benefit" claims are bullshit. Here you go! Stop embarrassing yourself.

[–]Long-Chair-7825 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh look, another triggered circumcised American. You guys never cease to crack me up.

No need to be an asshole about it. This is pretty much the first stage of grief.

And on top of all that, in a community that advocates for men's rights, you proceed to defend the continued sexual torture and disfigurement of helpless boys so you feel better about your little pecker.

Seriously? I'm going to direct you to a post I know you've seen before.. If someone were raped as a child, would you blame them for being in denial?

I get that you're angry about what parents are doing to their kids, but you should treat victims of this with kindness.

[+]bubbawears -11 points-10 points-9 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

lmao I'm not even remotely American nor defend anything forced. It's scary how much time you spend demonizing circumcision. Like I said I'm against it if it's forced or female circumcision. I'm circumcised and many people I know are. I NEVER heard shit you guys are naming ever. No one has problems. The real American thing is demonizing everything Muslim but I've learned, here on reddit that it's pointless to talk with people that can't even see the flaws in themselves.

[–]goodfoobar 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

demonizing everything Muslim

Being against circumcision is not about oppressing any religious group, it is a stop doing unnecessary physical damage thing, especially to infants.

[–]MarsNirgal 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There are health-related reasons to circumcise newborn males. Most of them aren’t factors until young adulthood, however. Circumcision is a decision best left to parents or to the child himself when he is older.

There, that's much better.

[–]ThingYea 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Way to leave out the cons buddy

[–]bubbawears -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

Big Brain Time He posted the Cons so I posted the Pros. Now I see with what I'm arguing lmao

[–]ThingYea 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You posted the cons? I see a poor list of pros from a source that says there's "no medical need for circumcision" for healthy newborns.

You left a whole lot of important info out of your reference and what's left does a bad job supporting your stance.

Not to mention that you called half their points bullshit and presented nothing to back that claim up.

Big brain alright.

[–]bubbawears -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You see i argued with a lot of you Hive Mind Brainiacs. I'm not going to waste more of my time on people that think they know anything but don't. I said several times I'm against circumcisions if they are forced or on babies if they can't consent. But if it's not forced there is no mutilation + I know a lot of people and am myself circumcised so I KNOW most of is cons are complete bullshit. You guys should just stop caring about shit that you don't understand or have any experience with.

[–]ThingYea 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The person you replied to listed a bunch of the functions of foreskin so idk why you're worked up like that. Do you think the foreskin does nothing?

[–]bubbawears-1 point 5 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No! I never said that I never even said anything you guys say I do. I'm not defending nor attacking anything. Originally I said that circumcision isn't mutilation if it's not forced and I stay with it. Of course there are pros and cons of everything but not everything is bad just because some Incels on reddit say it is.

[+]DNRforever -6 points-5 points-4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you for an intelligent and reasonable post. These are really rare. Most people just follow the Reddit hive mind

[–]frenchmengonnakil 11 points12 points13 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I myself don't know, since i was circumcised and i have only a CI of 3, but you can compare it to the eyelid and i can say that it probably is used to protect the glans, give a better sense field, and conserve useful bacteria when the body loses the others.

[–]lordtyp0 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not sure where eyelid came from-inner lip edge is more accurate.

[–]intactisnormal 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The foreskin is the most sensitive part of the penis. (Full study.)

Also check out the detailed anatomy and role of the foreskin in this presentation (for ~15 minutes) as Dr. Guest discusses the innervation of the penis, the mechanical function of the foreskin and its role in lubrication during sex, and the likelihood of decreased sexual pleasure for both male and partner.

[–]DarthEquus 12 points13 points14 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If I may, I would recommend checking out this presentation, Sex and Circumcision: An American Love Story. It is highly informative and should at least provide you with some laughs.

[–]goodfoobar 22 points23 points24 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It is difficult for men circumcised as infants to understand. Hopefully the following can give you some insight. Gently brush the back of your hand. You are stimulating pain nerve endings. These are the nerve endings that remain in cut males. Gently brush the palm of your hand. You are stimulating ticklish nerve endings(Meissner's corpuscles). These nerve endings exist in the foreskin in high concentrations. It can be said that being intact is to seeing in colour as being cut is to seeing in black and white. Some cut men feel numbness or mostly black while others feel high pain sensitivity or blinding white.

Circumcised men have higher Alexithymia scores. Alexithymia is the inability to process emotions.

http://intactnews.org/node/131/1316710012/study-links-circumcision-personality-trait-disorder

[–]Tuguy420 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah man an ex and I had a conversation like that before, she asked if I could feel the end of her I was like tf no????

[–]airtur -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Circumcised men have higher Alexithymia scores

why.. lazy to google now

[–]tothecatmobile 12 points13 points14 points 5 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

The simplest reason, even ignoring all the medical ones. Is that body autonomy is a thing.

Outside of necessary medial reasons, it is completely unethical for one person to make permanent changes to another person's body.

Babies are not the property of their parents, for the parents to do with as they wish.

[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points 5 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

Now if only we’d make this argument for abortion...

Outside of necessary medial reasons, it is completely unethical for one person to make permanent changes to another person's body. Babies are not the property of their parents, for the parents to do with as they wish. 

[–]tothecatmobile 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

For abortion the body autonomy argument is still the strongest one.

[–]Kut_Throat1125 -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Just not in the child’s interest I see.

Kill him if you want, just don’t circumcise him.

[–]MarsNirgal 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Okay, I'll bite. The thing with the abortion debate is that the two sides aren't even talking about the same thing.

The pro-life side thinks that the fetus is an independent human being from the moment of conception and has rights that can even trample the bodily autonomy of the mother.

The pro-choice side thinks that the fetus cannot be considered a human being on the early stages of conception (in which most of the voluntary abortions take place anyway).

So they're basically using drastically different definitions and no side will be willing to accept the definitions of the other side, which is why no one can ever change the other side's mind in these discussions. There is a fundamental incompatibility of values.

So regarding your argument, for the bodily autonomy side "kill him if you want" does not apply because for them there is nothing to kill there.

[–]Kut_Throat1125 -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wonderful argument, I don’t care.

[–]tothecatmobile 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Like it or not, yes. Body autonomy comes before others lives.

Otherwise it would be ok to force people to give blood or donate a kidney.

[+]thwip621 points 5 years ago* [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

I'm a man, abortion doesn't affect me. I did, however, have my penis mutilated without my consent. That affects me, as a man, directly.

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

A fetus(a developing human), which has a 50% chance of being a male, is getting it’s entirely body mutilated and disposed of. It hasn’t effected you, but it could have. You wouldn’t be here if it had.

[+]thwip621 points 5 years ago* [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

If I were aborted, I would be in no position to care one way or the other. I wouldn't exist. I never would have existed, at least not in any sense that matters. You may as well ask "What if my parents used protection?" I was, however, put through "circumcision" for no reason, and it has affected me. My mother tells me I reacted badly, and that it put me off my feed for a long time. At the age of 33, I had an operation to minimise some of the damage. Sexually speaking, I've had problems that are the direct result of being cut, plus I don't think a cut penis looks right.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

The difference between using protection and conception is that when the sperm and the egg combine, a whole new genetically defined human is created. Every physical trait and some mental traits are formed. The way I see dependence in the womb, is similar to the dependence by any human on shelter. A child will struggle to survive without being protected in the wild (or outside the womb.)

[+]thwip621 points 5 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

The difference between using protection and conception is that when the sperm and the egg combine, a whole new genetically defined human is created. Every physical trait and some mental traits are formed. The way I see dependence in the womb, is similar to the dependence by any human on shelter. A child will struggle to survive without being protected in the wild (or outside the womb.)

I wasn't sleeping at college during biology. Thanks for the lesson, though.

I'm sorry that your mother reacted the way she did.

What?! I never said my mother reacted anyway, I said that she said as a baby, I reacted badly after being mutilated.

I'm sorry that your mother reacted the way she did.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Whoops, misread what you said ;)

Reddit is limiting my time between responses, so there may be a pause if I need to respond to anything.

[–]Dickless_50s_Boy 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I wish I was never circumsized. It's done to my knowledge because it reduces chance of stds, hygiene related sicknesses, and cancer. When I was circumsized I picked up an std from the nurse touching my dick. If you have safe sex you're not gonna get an std anyway. If you know basic cleanliness you'll be fine as far as hygiene goes. To my knowledge the only way it prevents cancer is by having less skin physically. Circumcision started (at least partially) to take sexual pleasure away from young boys to discourage sex. It's also extremely painful for the babies, and reduces sexual pleasure as you mature (significantly). It also can never be undone. I think all optional permanent medical operations (and yes, I include medical gender changes) should be outlawed until the person in question is old enough to consent.

[+]airtur -8 points-7 points-6 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

infections make cancers so unclean can do that l guess, many are careless like from drug drink and mental. std was deadly sometimes still is. like aids in poor lands

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

Can anyone translate this, please?

[–]airtur -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

infetions make swelling of flesh that causes cancer sometimes. it happens under foreskin if careless about cleaning

[–]AshJPrower 12 points13 points14 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Maybe it isn't bad itself. Actually if you have sone conditions (like phimosis) it's beneficial. The real problem is when little boys are circumcised unnecessary when they are very young, for example (maybe for “cultural” or religious reasons). If an adult want to have his foreskin cut for x or y motive it's on his right to do it, but nobody should impose that a young boy have to be circumcised for any reason. I'm a little bit bussy so, maybe, this argument could sound vague cuz I'm writing it fast but, I think you got the point.

[–]Tuguy420 19 points20 points21 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Makes sense to get cut for a medical reason, but yeah you guys got the right idea I think. Cutting my dick because it's part of a religion or culture is pretty stupid man

[–]DirtAndGrass 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There is also a mortality rate (small) There is also some evidence that it might contribute to mental disorders

[–]anons-a-moose 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Phimosis only effects 1% of men.

[–]mapplemobs 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://www.foregen.org/the-human-foreskin

Circumcision is performed to intentionally dampen male sexuality. It started as medieval practice when the leg of a table was sexualized (because of prudishness), which then became popular in the United States - eventually becoming propagandized under the guise of "medical benefits" to sell the idea to the general public.

John Harvey Kellogg's was a major advocate - the same guy who endorsed pouring Carbolic Acid on a female's clitoris to control sexual impulses and prevent her from wanting to have sex.

The majority of nerves are removed by this process. It only has medical downsides, not upsides - the "lower infections rates" claim has been widely debunked and refuted by anyone who researches this subject credibly.

[+]hball6661 points 5 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

It isn't. It isn't even comparable to FGM. It's some kind of attempt to make out that men are being abused. It's BS in my opinion. I was circumcised for medical reasons. I don't feel mutilated.

Compared to having the clitoris removed, it's ridiculous to compare.

[–]LadyKnight151 21 points22 points23 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's comparable to some forms of FGM. FGM is a spectrum ranging from a ceremonial pinprick to complete removal of the clitoral hood. Ultimately, it shouldn't matter whether or not male and female circumcision are comparable. They are both used to remove healthy tissue from a child too young to consent and usually without any medical reason

[–]bill_end 11 points12 points13 points 5 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

If you were circumcised for medical reasons which couldn't be fixed by less invasive treatments then it is clearly not a mutilation.

Just as we don't say that people with amputated limbs are mutilated, but if someone cut my hand of for spurious moral/religious reasons I would feel and be pretty fucking mutilated. The main concern is that it is being done routinely to children and babies without medical reason when they cannot consent.

It is also done to many people for alleged medical reasons when a less invasive or severe treatment would fix the problem, i.e. many misinformed or culturally biased doctors will jump straight to circumcision for minor penis problems like phimosis which can, in most cases, be fixed with a steroid cream and stretching, or a dorsal slit which cuts the foreskin but doesn't remove any tissue. This is unlike any other medical procedure in that doctors should try the least invasive treatment first and only proceed to removal of tissue when all else has failed. For example, I could get my ingrown toenails fixed by having my toes amputated, but no doctor would do that without first trying to remove a bit of nail.

The reason for this injustice, particularly in the US, is that doctors assign no value to the foreskin. Many have been circumcised themselves and it is a cultural norm to do it, despite there being no medical benefit. The foreskin is not essential for most men to ejaculate and orgasm, therefore it is easy to pretend that the foreskin is a useless flap of skin so nothing is lost when it is amputated.

In reality, it is the most sensitive part of the penis so people with foreskins will generally get more pleasure from and find sex and masturbation easier than circumcised men. It also has an important mechanical and lubricating role in that the penis glides in and out of the foreskin during sex. It helps to lubricate both the man and his partner, plus it prevents the head of the penis from dragging vaginal lubrication out with every thrust. Consequently, intact men have less / no need for bottled lube when masturbating or having sex.

Intact men also generally make better lovers as they don't need to bang away like a jackhammer with furious thrusting because that's the only way they can create enough sensation to cum. The intact penis spends a lot more tine inside the vagina during sex because it is more sensitive so shorter, less violent thrusts are needed to cause an orgasm, resulting in much more stimulation of the clitoris. My foreskin is so sensitive, I can bring myself to orgasm just by light rubbing around my frenulum with my little finger. That doesn't mean I will ejaculate prematurely as I can still control the situation. The whole experience of sex or masturbation feels very nice and I also experience 100s of mini "foreskin orgasms" where my cock will actually jerk about on its own as I'm being stimulated. Often for circumcised men, its all about the orgasm only and the feelings and sensation before cumming are non existent or severely diminished.

The head of the penis should actually be a primarily internal organ, protected at most times by the foreskin. Removing it causes the skin on the head to harden and dry out with all the rubbing it does on your underwear. This process of keratinisation continues throughout life so a man in his 50s will have less sensation than he did in his 20s, often resulting in inability to cum. Evolution has designed the penis to work perfectly with the vagina for reproduction, it is ridiculous to think that man can improve something that has developed over millions of years. All mammals have one as it serves an important purpose.

There are many negative effects of even the most successful circumcisions, but it is also often botched leading to additional life long problems like impotence, delayed or premature ejaculation, painful or bent erections, loss of sensation, disfigurement, reduction in size and a whole host of other problems. This is often exacerbated because performing an accurate surgery on a baby's tiny penis is much more difficult than doing it to a full sized adult one. The most common form of circumcision nowadays also removes the maximum amount of tissue possible, far more than was removed when the Bible was written.

The primary reason it remains prevalent in the US is because it was introduced in the 1800s to discourage people from masturbation, which at the time was believed to cause all kinds of illnesses. The procedure is designed to reduce sexual pleasure and desire. Virtually all other developed nations now recognise the harm it causes so it is not done unless for religious reasons to a minority of Jews and Muslims.

If there truly were benefits, men in non circumcising nations would be queueing up to have it done when they're old enough to consent. But that doesn't happen because they know how much pleasure it provides and all of the spurious benefits to circumcision simply don't exist.

For reasons I cannot fathom, perhaps cultural bias, perhaps financial incentive, American doctors continue to recommend it even though the medical justifications they use have now been debunked as bullshit. I can understand why, it is very difficult to admit and accept that a painful and damaging surgery has been done to such an important organ. No man wants to accept that their penis doesn't work as well as it should, or that they may be sexually affected as result. Therefore it is easy to rationalise as something beneficial and necessary rather than accept the truth. And hence the cycle continues and baby boys get cut so they can be like dad. Fortunately it is declining but not fast enough.

This situation where Bill Gates and the UN is forcing it on African men and boys by lying to them, coercing them and bribing them is simply obscene in my opinion.

[–]anons-a-moose 11 points12 points13 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's more comparable to labiaplasty. Why aren't we mandating labiaplasty for girls ar birth?

[–]ALTSuzzxingcoh 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Good thing you support going around and sawing people's arms off since, obviously, "outright murder is much worse than assault".

[+]Tuguy420 -18 points-17 points-16 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That is quite the drastic comparison though man you make a good point. When I was younger I thought there was only 2 types of dudes, drills and mushrooms haha

[–]yadoya 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Eli5?

[–]tehtreven 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So I know you want this food so you and your family can eat and survive... buuuut we’re gonna need to see your dick first.

[–]DanteLivra 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's disgusting, what happened to "my body, my choice" ?

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

This is slow genocide.

Men get circumcised believing it protects them from HIV. They don't use condoms and eventually get HIV. Then of course they suffer and die from AIDS.

[–]Radikost 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If women can choose if they get an abortion. Why can’t men choose if they want to get cicumsised? His body, his choice

[–]IGargleGarlic 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This sounded completely insane and fake, but the sources all check out. This is truly barbaric.

[–]stuffed_tiger[🍰] 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Guys, let's stop cutting our dickskin so women can't rub it on their faces. Simple as that.

[–]Sarah-loves-cats 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

How does that even work? Is it normal to pull out your dick to get food?

[–]haikusbot 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

How does that even work?

Is it normal to pull out

Your dick to get food?

- Sarah-loves-cats


I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully. Learn more about me.

Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete"

[–]Mega-Auron 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Good bot

[–]mhelena9201[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

no obviously not, UN and WHO are linking giving money and food aid and medicine to circumcision uptake in areas. Areas where they are refusing circumcision or is low are not getting food aid. As a result, these mobs are going around cutting men

[–]whatafoolishsquid 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Author here. My article is merely a summary. Please visit https://www.vmmcproject.org/ to learn more in detail, watch interviews with victims and discover how you can help.

[–]dogmashah 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I read comments that it facilitates stem research but fail to understand why they would do that in a rural part of Africa. Are those men trying to abduct and then sell off the foreskin ?

[–]jackjo937 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

this is just distrusting and horrifying that's it

[–]will2fight 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

All for the stem cell...this is evil.

[–]Cantersoft 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

We need a new movement called "Male Lives Matter".

[–]GoelandAnonyme 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why would they want to circumcise them?

[–]RaPiiD38 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Unforgivable, skin the bastard who implemented this.

[–]Valiantay 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Definitely don't agree with circumcision but I couldn't find any corroborating evidence of this online

[–]de777vil 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well UN wistleblower said that UN is doxing uyghur muslims who want meetings at UN and chinese goverment kidnaping and putting them in prison based on that information and WHO having shady stories with China so this is not surprising these organizations are good in name and slogans but reality is different.

[–]disenchantedprincess 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is sooo sickening!

[–]MarsNirgal 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd like to see better sources for the "uncircumcised men being refused food vouchers and vaccines". I did a bit of research and the closest I could find were these two things:

A study of uncircumcised men being discriminated on religious grounds in South Africa: https://www.malecircumcision.org/sites/default/files/document_library/South_Africa_MC_case_study_May_2008_002_0.pdf

A program to give food vouchers to men who are about to take a circumcision as part of an HIV prevention program, to make up for lost wages during the time they will be incapacitated: https://sph.unc.edu/sph-news/food-vouchers-improve-rates-of-medical-circumcision-for-hiv-prevention-in-kenya/

I'd say there is a big difference between giving food vouchers to men about to be circumcised, as a one-time thing, and denying food voucers and so to uncircumcised men. And there is a big difference between

I'm still rather very skeptical about this program, although considering that in some of these countries access to protection for safe sex may be very limited, if there is properly informed consent and done in a voluntary basis by adult men I could see how it may be a good health option. But I'm not sure about the report in this particular link, I'd like to see some links or reports confirming it.

Specially because something like they describe, of groups of men forcefully circumcising kids/teens, seems to me to be much more culturally motivated than medically motivated.

Although I'll admit, there may be a lot of synergy playing here between the promotion of circumcision in the program and the cultural mores of these countries. I can see how it could make them feel vindicated in their belief that circumcision is desirable enough that it could be done forcefully to others.

[–]Rockbottom503 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

People are always shocked and surprised when I say I don't support the UN but this shit is why!

[–]mhelena9201[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/hhwyz5/the_un_is_responsible_for_hundreds_of_thousands/

[–]locks_are_paranoid 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm going to need some proof of this. There's no way that any of this is true.

[–]felrozlokk 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I like to look else where whenever I see something like this. I looked into it a bit while I'm on break and the only thing I can find thats recent about circumcision in devolping countries. is an article about comparing who and US lead to circumcise boy and men to prevent hiv to tuskegee.

[–]mhelena9201[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh boy your in for a surpsie. Circucmision aside, the systematic sexual torture of men e.g. in prisons, political prisoners etc is extremely common as it mass systematic male rape e.g. africa, and also forcing men to rape their children etc in wars..... of course for women also e.g. rape, mutilation etc.

[–]martellthacool 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What the hell 😱

[–]Liazabeth 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Hmm no Zulu and Xhosa has been practicing circumcision always, its as much part of their traditions and culture than in western cultures but they do it as a right of passage when you become a man. In some African cultures they circumcise their daughters- they cut off their clitoris then stitch her closed so penetration is impossible until marriage. This was not 'brought' to them by western cultures thats just a ignorant statement wanting to believe all things bad comes from western society.

[–]mhelena9201[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Circumcision was not brought from the west to the Africa. Quite the opposite. The WHO and the UN however are on a massive circumcision promotion policy and have done and will do tens of millions of circumcisions.

Do some research. They are even inventing devices to make it possible and safer etc in africa.

[–]Liazabeth 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thats sounds like a good thing. A friend of mine almost died doing the ritual. So I am being confused by title are you against it or for it? They normally let sangoma do it in bush with just a blade. Horrendous really so they had mass promotions for safer circumcision practices.

[–]ReptileLigit 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Is there a link to this story on a more credible site than "woke father" I'm not doubting the story but I just want it for re sharability

[–]tbeidj 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nonononono. NO. Don't blame WESTERN SOCIETY.

We DO NOT want to be associated with circumcision. Only backwards ass kind of first world not really first world countries (we all know I'm talking about the US) do this kind of shit. The rest of the developed cultured world sits back in shock and horror. The obvious exclusion is the genital mutilation promoting religions and regions.

Basically religion and the US is to blame. And the rest of us don't want to be included anywhere near those groups.

I'm so sorry this is happening, absolutely horrifying and we stand beside abolishing this terrible act.

[–]RevolutionaryAd4497 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Foregen wants to regenerate male foreskin with all specialized structures, if you want to know more about it : www.foregen.org

[–]SeaBreezyDay369 -4 points-3 points-2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

r/foreskin_restoration

[–]devilsadvocate09 -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Why does a football organization care about dudes' dicks?

[–]barthvonries 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Which football organization ?

[–]devilsadvocate09 -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

UNICEF

[–]barthvonries 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

What does UNICEF has to do with football ?

It's United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund... nothing related to football...

[–]devilsadvocate09 3 points4 points5 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nvm, I was thinking CONCACAF

[–]Long-Chair-7825 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

How did you come to the conclusion that unicef is a football organization?

[–]airtur 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

unicef is a football organization?

n 2003, UNICEF sponsored Italian football club Piacenza Calcio 1919 until 2008. On 7 September 2006, an agreement between UNICEF and the Spanish Catalan association football club FC Barcelona was reached whereby the club would donate €1.5 million per year to the organization for five years

[+]AllGodsAreFalseGods-1 points 5 years ago* [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

Circumcision dramatically reduces instances of HIV.

This is scientifically verifiable.

[–]Zappaa1142 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The studies show a decrease in female to male HIV transmission. However those three studies these programs have been based on have been heavily scrutinized. There is a less often cited study that shows circumcised men are actually MORE likely to transmit HIV to women. I can provide a source to that paper if you'd like but I'm not able to at the moment.

The level at which circumcision reduces HIV transmission (if you take those three studies at face value) is actually still quite low and in my opinion does not warrant the massive push for circumcision that has been promoted since their findings.

[–]intactisnormal 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

“The number needed to [circumcise] to prevent one HIV infection varied, from 1,231 in white males to 65 in black males, with an average in all males of 298.” That originates from the CDC.

A terrible statistic. Especially when circumcision is not effective prevention and condoms must be used regardless.

And we can look at the real world results: “The African findings are also not in line with the fact that the United States combines a high prevalence of STDs and HIV infections with a high percentage of routine circumcisions. The situation in most European countries is precisely the reverse: low circumcision rates combined with low HIV and STD rates. Therefore, other factors seem to play a more important role in the spread of HIV than circumcision status. This finding also suggests that there are alternative, less intrusive, and more effective ways of preventing HIV than circumcision, such as consistent use of condoms, safe-sex programs, easy access to antiretroviral drugs, and clean needle programs."

I also like their discussion about how this is not relevant to newborns or children: "As with traditional STDs, sexual transmission of HIV occurs only in sexually active individuals. Consequently, from an HIV prevention perspective, if at all effective in a Western context, circumcision can wait until boys are old enough to engage in sexual relationships. Boys can decide for themselves, therefore, whether they want to get circumcised to obtain, at best, partial protection against HIV or rather remain genitally intact and adopt safe-sex practices that are far more effective. As with the other possible benefits, circumcision for HIV protection in Western countries fails to meet the criteria for preventive medicine: there is no strong evidence for effectiveness and other, more effective, and less intrusive means are available. There is also no compelling reason why the procedure should be performed long before sexual debut; sexually transmitted HIV infection is not a relevant threat to children".

That's critical. HIV via sex is not relevant to newborns. If you'd like to take extra security measures by cutting off part of your genitals you are absolutely free to do so. Others may choose to wear condoms. Or to abstain from sex until a committed relationship. Outside of medical necessity the choice is up to the individual.

If you’d prefer, you can watch this presentation instead: Dr. Guest discusses that “any protective effect at all is obviously overshadowed by behavioural factors.” before discussing the absolute HIV numbers and the methodological flaws with the African studies including that the circumcised men were unable to have sex for 6-8 weeks, the prevalence and impact of sex workers, that malaria helped spread HIV in the study area, and problems with early closure of the study.

And we know that intact men use condoms more frequently: “Multivariate findings supported the conclusion that intact men may use condoms more frequently and that confidence predicts use, suggesting that intervention programmes should focus on building men's confidence to use condoms, especially for circumcised men.”

Of course condoms are actually effective and must be used regardless to prevent STIs and HIV. This completely negates the role of circumcision.

[–]airtur 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

was it debated it true not so good the african studies.

[–]theninjallama -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The picture of the soccer team holding up the banner is very clearly photoshopped...

[–]itsvuksfault -1 points0 points1 point 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fuck you

[–]felrozlokk -5 points-4 points-3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Id like to get additional sources cause its not that I dont trust every new outlet but I dont and I'd really like to dig into this a bit deeper when I get a moment

[+]Hodgepodge02 -28 points-27 points-26 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I’m circumcised, I don’t notice anything wrong. While it’s super screwed up to deny ppl healthcare over it I don’t consider it “mutilation” or in no way comparable to FGM. Before I get crucified over saying FGM is a bigger problem I’m referring to the Middle East, North Africa, south east Asia, etc.. where Islam is the dominant religion.

[–]goodfoobar 17 points18 points19 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Every region that perform FGM also performs MGM. Each region uses similar medical environments for both genders. There are many countries such as the US that only perform MGM.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaEoQVZnN8I

[–]Fofalus 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Why can't you discuss MGM without discussing FGM or is that also only a one way street?

[–]Hodgepodge02 -4 points-3 points-2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don’t consider circumcision to be MGM.

[–]Fofalus 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Unfortunately what you consider isn't relevant. By definition it is MGM.

[–]mhelena9201[S] 5 points6 points7 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Good for you. The hundreds of thousands of boys and men who have died, had penises amputated, suffered issues or estimated millions of men who are restoring their foreskin do see it as wrong.

[–]An-autistic-cat 21 points22 points23 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Because you’d have to admit you were a victim and your parents didn’t care enough to stop it in order to see something wrong with it. Which most people have a problem doing and thus the cycle continues because “I had it done and I’m fine”.

[+]Hodgepodge02 -18 points-17 points-16 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

But I don’t consider myself a victim. It’s religious

[–]intactisnormal 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can consider yourself as not a victim. But that does not mean you can circumcise other people.

As for religion, one person's religious rights ends at another person's body. If someone grows up and wants to circumcise themself for their own chosen religion, they are absolutely free to do so. That does not mean they can circumcise somebody else.

[+]Giuliano_Zhang -17 points-16 points-15 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

But isn't the circumcision for good reasons? I'm not circumcised but searching on the internet circumcision reduces chances of HIV and if I'm not wrong HIV is more common in Africa so wouldn't be circumcised be better? I agree 100% that it shouldnt be done forcefully against someone's will but it doesn't sound that bad to me. I'm ignorant on the subject so correct me if I'm wrong

[–]DarthEquus 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

See my reply here

[+]Giuliano_Zhang -12 points-11 points-10 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It must have health benefits if big organization spend so much money into promoting and practicing it, even if very small benefits, even if it did, I agree that it's wrong to do it forcefully

[–]intactisnormal 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

From the Canadian Paediatrics Society:

“It has been estimated that 111 to 125 normal infant boys (for whom the risk of UTI is 1% to 2%) would need to be circumcised at birth to prevent one UTI.” And UTIs can easily be treated with antibiotics.

"The foreskin can become inflamed or infected (posthitis), often in association with the glans (balanoposthitis) in 1% to 4% of uncircumcised boys." This is not a common issue and can easily be treated if it happens.

"An estimated 0.8% to 1.6% of boys will require circumcision before puberty, most commonly to treat phimosis. The first-line medical treatment of phimosis involves applying a topical steroid twice a day to the foreskin, accompanied by gentle traction. This therapy ... allow[s] the foreskin to become retractable in 80% of treated cases, thus usually avoiding the need for circumcision."

“The number needed to [circumcise] to prevent one HIV infection varied, from 1,231 in white males to 65 in black males, with an average in all males of 298.” And circumcision is not effective prevention, condoms must be used regardless.

“Decreased penile cancer risk: [Number needed to circumcise] = 900 – 322,000” to prevent a single case of penile cancer.

These stats are terrible, it's disingenuous for these to be called legitimate health benefits. And more importantly each item has a normal treatment or prevention that is both more effective and less invasive.

Meanwhile the foreskin is the most sensitive part of the penis.(Full study.)

If you want more on HIV, see here.

[+]flyredditguy1 points 5 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

It has no effect either way, why??? Jesus Christ

[–]bill_end 10 points11 points12 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It has many effects, all of them negative to a functional penis. In a tiny number of cases it is necessary to fix a deformation or medical issue. But to do it to a normal penis causes a great amount of damage.

[–]flyredditguy -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I thought uncircumcised and circumcised dicks perform and work the same way whether one way or the other. I am uneducated on the topic I guess.

[–]bill_end 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Afraid not. The foreskin provides important mechanical functions by allowing the head of the penis to glide inside and outside of the foreskin, providing stimulation and lubrication. It also protects the head of the penis which is ordinarily an internal organ, much like the eyelids protect and moisten the eye.

It is also the most sensitive part of the penis so removing it results in less feeling and pleasure.

Millions of years of evolution has designed the penis to work perfectly and in conjunction with the vagina. Mankind can't improve it by chopping bits off for cultural reasons.

[+]bubbawears -65 points-64 points-63 points 5 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

Circumcision isn't mutilation. If it's forced it's bad and we should do something against it but many people do it voluntarily and have no bad side effects like female circumcision.

[–]Eastuss 23 points24 points25 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Circumcision is mutilation, there's no arguing lol. something as tiny as a ear piercing is mutilation, even voluntarily, you know.

It has side effects.

[–]Rorschach_And_Prozac 36 points37 points38 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Babies can't consent to anything, including getting part of their genitals cut off, you sick fuck.

[–]tendaga 32 points33 points34 points 5 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

... you're fucking special ain't ya. Chopping off a part of a babies body for literally no reason is mutilation and it reduces sexual pleasure immensely. I was circumcised as an adult so I can say with certainty it had bad side effects.

[+]bubbawears -36 points-35 points-34 points 5 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

I'm circumcised and I can't say that. So chill i know a lot of people and no one has any problem with it.

[–]Xeno_Lithic 27 points28 points29 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's how people justify FGM. Mutilating a baby is fucked up. Period.

[–]tendaga 25 points26 points27 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You're advocating child abuse and genital mutilation against baby's as okay because they have a penis. Do us all a favor and go buy me the big box of crayons so I'll have enough colours to explain why that's a wrong thing to do.

[–]TheDwiin 21 points22 points23 points 5 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Survivor bias. Circumcisions have been linked to baby boys dying of SIDS. It's like saying that you rode in the back of a pickup truck and survived.

[+]bubbawears -18 points-17 points-16 points 5 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I was just saying that it isn't ALWAYS mutilation if it's done with consent and done by an expert. You guys just circle jerk against anything you disagree with and have no experience. Saying that I justify Female circumcision is as retarded as the other shit you guys say. Because of morons like you Men around the world will have problems to get their rights.

[–]TheDwiin 19 points20 points21 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Saying that you are fine after your circumcision and using it as an excuse to continue the mass mutilation of neonatal genitals invalidates all of the infants who have died due to complications surrounding theirs.

I'm not against circumcision as a whole, just the regular circumcision of infants.

[–]bubbawears -2 points-1 points0 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I've said that im against it if it isn't voluntary but you guys just jerk each other of. I said it's not ALWAYS mutilation: Mutilation: the act of damaging something severely, especially by violently removing a part

[–]tendaga 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It is mutilation by that definition. And so is like major gauge punching. I mean fuck I'd willing to cut off the tips of my ring fingers for giggles and while it would be voluntary it would still be mutilating myself.

[–]tendaga 11 points12 points13 points 5 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I had it done voluntarily when I converted. I agree I had cosmetic surgery essentially and while I do regret doing it I can live with it. Forced cosmetic surgery with serious side effects and no real medical benefit in modern society because it "looks cleaner" is mutilation plain and simple.

[–]bubbawears -4 points-3 points-2 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It is cleaner and now you are just bashing against it because you are a moron ? How can you say that it's bad because you don't like it and simultaneously tell me I can't because I don't have a problem with it ?

[–]tendaga 6 points7 points8 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It really isn't cleaner if you regularly shower. Remember I used to have a foreskin as an adult until I converted for religious purposes. So long as you're not a filthy bastard there's nothing dirtier about foreskin than a labia. And we don't go cutting those off to make vaginas cleaner. Rightfully so cause it's fucked up. It's a cosmetic surgery originally practiced for religious purposes and later to curb male masturbation.

I'm not against you doing it for yourself or doing it because you have to for medical reasons. I really have no problem with you going in your bathroom and snipping your foreskin off with some safety scissors. Hell I have a strong active wish to remove the tips of two of my fingers and I think I should be able to do that too if I want to.

But I do have a real problem with you promoting other people doing it for bad reasons.

[+]Tuguy420 -25 points-24 points-23 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

We dont got cheese bro

[–]yungface 20 points21 points22 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Neither does anyone who practices basic hygiene.

[–]bill_end 9 points10 points11 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Have you also had your toes cut off to ensure you don't get cheesy bits between your toes? Or do you just wash your feet in the shower?

[–]bill_end 7 points8 points9 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Very few people have it done voluntarily. Some folk do for fetish reasons. Some because they live in a culture where it is promoted. But go to a developed country in Europe and virtually no men will have it done unless they take up a religion that requires it or they were circumcised without consent during childhood.

The vast majority of men who make it to adulthood with their penis intact would never consider it because they know how important and enjoyable the foreskin is.

[–]IMakeTheMeta 18 points19 points20 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

“Has no bad side effects like female circumcision” How about 30% decrease in sensitivity, along with 100+ deaths per year in the US from botched circumcisions?

[–]TheDwiin 13 points14 points15 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not to mention the link in normal circumcisions to SIDS.

[–]Tophat-boi 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This.

[+]pachonga9 -41 points-40 points-39 points 5 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

There was an episode on this on the Science Vs podcast. It actually significantly reduced the transmission of AIDS. Edit: well gee guys. I’m not saying kidnapping people and forcing them to slice their tallywackers is a good thing. I’m just saying circumcising has had significant health benefits in some places. Lol

[–]DarthEquus 30 points31 points32 points 5 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

The frequent claim is that circumcision reduces the risk of men contracting HIV by 60%. This is based on the results of three randomized controlled trials done in Africa ([1], [2], [3]). The researchers found in their studies that  2.5% of intact men and 1.2% of circumcised men got HIV. The 60% figure is the relative risk (2.5%-1.2%/2.5%). Media outlets even take the liberty of dismissing basic mathematics and round up the relative reduction from 52% to 60%, making for an even more impressive (yet exaggerated) number.

If circumcision did reduce rates of HIV transmission, which it doesn't, it would be a small reduction. The Canadian Paediatric Society says this, using estimates from the CDC:

“The number needed to [circumcise] to prevent one HIV infection varied, from 1,231 in white males to 65 in black males, with an average in all males of 298. The model did not account for the cost of complications of circumcision. In addition, there is a risk that men may overestimate the protective effect of being circumcised and be less likely to adopt safe sex practices.”

These figures are relevant only if the trials were accurate in the first place. There were several methodological errors:

  • The circumcised experimental group got more medical care, including education on the proper use of condoms
  • In one study, circumcised men's infection rates were increasing faster than the intact men's until the study was terminated early
  • The circumcised group could not have sex for 4-6 weeks after the circumcision; this was excluded from the analysis and distorts the results
  • HIV was contracted through means other than sex (e.g. contaminated needles)
  • The trials were terminated early when statistical significance was reached. Though they did reach statistical significance, they never reached clinical significance
  • Significantly more men were lost to the studies than tested positive for HIV
  • Also, many of the researchers had cultural and religious biases

There is no histological evidence which supports the hypothesis that circumcision reduces the risk of HIV/AIDS infections. It is probable that circumcision doesn’t help at all, or potentially even makes things worse. For example, there are statistics showing that there was a 61% relative increase (6% absolute increase) in HIV infection among female partners of circumcised men. It appears that the number of circumcisions needed to infect a woman was 16.7, with one woman becoming infected for every 17 circumcisions performed.

Further criticism of the African RCTs:

Critique of African RCTs into Male Circumcision and HIV Sexual Transmission

On the basis of three seriously flawed sub-Saharan African randomized clinical trials into female-to-male (FTM) sexual transmission of HIV, in 2007 WHO/UNAIDS recommended circumcision (MC) of millions of African men as an HIV preventive measure, despite the trials being compromised by irrational motivated reasoning, inadequate equipoise, selection bias, inadequate blinding, problematic randomization, trials stopped early with exaggerated treatment effects, and failure to investigate non-sexual transmission. Several questions remain unanswered. Why were the trials carried out in countries where more intact men were HIV+ than in those where more circumcised men were HIV+? Why were men sampled from specific ethnic subgroups? Why were so many men lost to follow-up? Why did men in the intervention group receive additional counselling on safe sex practices? The absolute reduction in HIV transmission associated with MC was only 1.3 % (without even adjusting for known sources of error bias). Relative reduction was reported as 60 %, but after correction for lead-time bias alone averaged 49 %. In a related Ugandan RCT into male-to-female (MTF) transmission, there was a 61 % relative increase (6 % absolute increase) in HIV infection among female partners of circumcised men, some of whom were not informed that their male partners were HIV+ (also some of the men were not informed by the researchers that they were HIV+). It appears that the number of circumcisions needed to infect a woman (Number Needed to Harm) was 16.7, with one woman becoming infected for every 17 circumcisions performed. As the trial was stopped early for “futility,” the increase in HIV infections was not statistically significant, although clinically significant. In the Kenyan trial, MC was associated with at least four new incident infections. Since MC diverts resources from known preventive measures and increases risk-taking behaviors, any long-term benefit in reducing HIV transmission remains dubious.

Circumcision of male infants and children as a public health measure in developed countries: A critical assessment of recent evidence

How the circumcision solution in Africa will increase HIV infections

Sexually Transmitted Infections and Male Circumcision: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

A fatal irony: Why the “circumcision solution” to the AIDS epidemic in Africa may increase transmission of HIV

A comparison of condom use perceptions and behaviours between circumcised and intact men attending sexually transmitted disease clinics in the United States

This investigation compared circumcised and intact (uncircumcised) men attending sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics on condom perceptions and frequencies of use. Men (N = 316) were recruited from public clinics in two US states. Circumcision status was self-reported through the aid of diagrams. Intact men were less likely to report unprotected vaginal sex (P < 0.001), infrequent condom use (P = 0.02) or lack of confidence to use condoms (P = 0.049). The bivariate association between circumcision status and unprotected sex was moderated by age (P < 0.001), recent STD acquisition (P < 0.001) and by confidence level for condom use (P < 0.001). The bivariate association between circumcision status and infrequent condom use was also moderated by age (P = 0.002), recent STI acquisition (P = 0.02) and confidence level (P = 0.01). Multivariate findings supported the conclusion that intact men may use condoms more frequently and that confidence predicts use, suggesting that intervention programmes should focus on building men's confidence to use condoms, especially for circumcised men.

The Fragility Index in HIV/AIDS Trials

The recent report by Wayant and colleagues on the fragility index did not include the African randomized clinical trials on HIV and adult male circumcision. Analysis of these trials may provide insight into the interaction between p values and fragility in overpowered studies. The three trials shared nearly identical methodologies, the same sources of differential bias (lead-time bias, attrition bias, selection bias, and confirmation bias), and nearly identical results. All three trials were powered to demonstrate an absolute risk reduction of 1%. All three were discontinued prematurely following interim analyses that satisfied pre-established early termination criteria.

The findings are also not in line with the fact that the United States combines a high prevalence of STDs and HIV infections with high circumcision rates. The situation in most European countries is the reverse: low circumcision rates combined with low HIV and STD rates. Therefore, other factors (mostly behavioral) play a more important role in the spread of HIV than circumcision status. This also shows that there are alternative, less intrusive, and more effective ways of preventing HIV than circumcision such as consistent use of condoms, safe-sex programs, proper sexual education, easy access to antiretroviral drugs, and clean needle programs.

[–]tendaga 29 points30 points31 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It also significantly reduces sensitivity. Like seriously and profoundly.

[–]User_identificationZ 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Do you know condoms exist

[+]pachonga9 -12 points-11 points-10 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Um...yeah. How is that relevant?

Never mind. Just continue plugging your ears and la-la-laing away with your incel crew.

[–]SBEAST666 8 points9 points10 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Your comment has boosted transmission of AIDS

[–]intactisnormal 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There was an episode on this on the Science Vs podcast.

See my response here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/jrikwv/male_genital_mutilation_circumcision_in/gc67lqa/

[+]Sphinxus -32 points-31 points-30 points 5 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Calm down there OP, no one likes a poncho penis, NO ONE!

[–]swampwitch116 11 points12 points13 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I do ;)

[+]froggymcfrogface -6 points-5 points-4 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Eww

[–]swampwitch116 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I love it when babies haven't been mutilated for no reason!

[–]daten-shi 10 points11 points12 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Are you forgetting the rest of the western world? Outside underdeveloped nations (like those in Africa) the only two major countries that have high circumcision rates are the US and Australia. The rest of the developed world have rates at less than 20% respectively.

[–]Surcal 4 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The circumcision rate in Australia is decreasing rapidly - people are aware of the issue and choosing to not have it done to babies

The Australian medical do not condone it - defence of circumcision is largely a US medical thing

[–]RavynArcadia 16 points17 points18 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Lies. I think getting snipped outside of med reasons is bullshit.

[–]Bad_Routes 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Doesn't make the excuse to cut it off better tho

[–]were_gonna_make_it 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Literally billions of people are perfectly fine with it.

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

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter