Feminists Starting to Lose Their Cool

[–]VoodooIdol 28 points29 points30 points 14 years ago (51 children) | Copy Link

[–]wavegeekman 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Metaphoricalsimile -23 points-22 points-21 points 14 years ago (49 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bobsutan 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]VoodooIdol 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

There's a huge difference between FGM and circumcision.

This is both true and untrue. There are varying degrees of female circumcision (and let's use this term - unless you're also willing to use the term "male genital mutilation") that range from just removing the hood, hood & labia, and worse. Male circumcision is much like hood or hood/labia removal. It causes similar types of sexual issues, is also done with no anesthetic, and can be performed by people with no medical license what-so-ever.

FGM is performed with the express purpose to deny the woman sexual pleasure for the entirety of her life.

This is not the intent of male circumcision, but according to countless studies it has the same result.

Circumcision, while certainly a backwards practice with dubious physiological benefits, does not have this effect unless there is an accident in the procedure.

Categorically untrue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_effects_of_circumcision

The very fact that these accidents happen is reason enough not to practice it, but comparing the two practices is one helluva false equivalency.

Only if your head is in the sand.

[+]Metaphoricalsimile -10 points-9 points-8 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bobsutan 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheeCandyMan 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]catipillar -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheeCandyMan -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]catipillar 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

My human sexuality encyclopedia. I will see if I can find an internet article for you, though so far all the ones that I have ever come across suggest that it's existence is debatable even still. I'm sure it won't help for me to tell you that of all of the women I know, two claim to have G-spots, and most of my girlfriends claim that they think it's nonsense. I know I certainly don't have one. I'll work on finding sources for you, though.

This is the gist of most articles that I've found:

"You bring up a topic that is a subject of fierce debate. Much has been written about the elusive G-spot, which is named for Ernst Grafenberg, the physician who first studied and explored this part of female sexual anatomy. Many medical care providers and some sexuality educators do not fully embrace the concept of the G-spot, so if you were to ask your doctor this question, he or she might say “no.” In fact, a recent British study claims to have found no conclusive evidence that the G-spot exists. So, depending on where you seek your information, you will receive different answers to this question. "

http://www.expressmilwaukee.com/article-11282-do-all-women-have-a-g-spot-.html

Oh, the Wikipedia article on it is similar to the aforementioned article when discussing scientific studies done of the subject.

From CNN Health:

"Ladies (and gentlemen): Can you find the G-spot?

Women everywhere have read or heard that they may possess a secret pleasure zone inside their bodies that, if stimulated correctly, yields intense pleasure and even orgasm. But this so-called G-spot has never been precisely identified as a concrete biological entity. Scientists are still arguing over what it is and whether it exists at all."

Here's some more.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/19/g-spot-does-not-exist_n_1215822.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-Spot

More to come.

"The Italians found that in some women the area is simply not anatomically equipped for the pinnacle of female pleasure. In short: some women have a G spot. And some women don't.

Using ultrasound, res-earchers scanned nine women who said they could experience vaginal orgasm, and 11 who could not"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/mystery-of-the-g-spot-explored-785601.html

Wow, I've found way more then I anticipated. Let me know if this isn't enough...I have about sixteen more.

[–]VoodooIdol 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Embogenous -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ValiantPie 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Metaphoricalsimile -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DevinV 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrStonedOne 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Gareth321[M] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrStonedOne 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

What? I think you posted a little too hastily there:

MODS: my post and the one im replying to reported to bring this kind of behaviour into light, and is in no way meant to imply a request for devins post or account from being deleted or banned

In short: I don't want him to be banned nor do I want his post deleted.

Also: I am not the same person whose posting history was commented on, I have only made two comments in this post, the one you are replying to and the one replying to you. please take a bit more time to evaluate a situation.

I am not Metaphoricalsimile, the person whose subreddit history was pointed out. I did not make a post marginalizing MGM and I am in fact full on anti-MGM.

I understand you have ALOT of reposts and drama and trolling to mitigate but if it's so bad that you have to skim thru a conversion thread so quickly that you confuse two separate posters and completely miss the point of the reasoning listed for the report then maybe its time to open up mod applications.

I don't mean to come off as rude but you just confused me with someone who marginalizes MGM who I was only defending out of principle. As an Anti-MGM MRA I think you can see how I might find that a bit offensive.

[–]Gareth321 -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrStonedOne 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Gareth321 -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PositiveBear 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]catipillar 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

Listen, everyone's going to bash me for this, but please recognize that there are enormous differences. I do feel tremendous disgust with male circumcision; my man and I have decided that when we have children, we won't ever have our boy circumcised. I've heard so many men say that their foreskin has quite a bit of feeling, and to remove a functioning part of my future son's penis seems more then a little absurd to me.

Female genital mutilation, however, is designed to destroy a vagina. The labia minora are removed, the clitoris is removed, thus rendering the outside of the vagina, which is the only sexually responsive part for over half of women, useless. The wounds are often cauterized, thus destroying the potential remnants of other nerve endings. Then, the opening of the vagina is often sewed shut until marriage, which results in infection from hindered menstrual flow, urethral infections, and in some cases, death or infertility.

[–]PositiveBear 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Which is all well and pretty fucking shitty. We should absolutely try to end that horrific practice.

It doesn't change the fact that it occurs in males in exponentially greater numbers, in "civilized" cultures with the approval of the state and the church. At least female genital mutilation is pretty universally called "terrible" by any reasonable person.

With regards to the female G-Spot, you're not going to level that one because it's not a controllable aspect of the mutilation itself. If the woman has one, then the mutilation was pretty damned worthless; if she doesn't, she's screwed but it's not like they actually -test- for it. I'm not saying that makes it acceptable at all but I am going to say that it doesn't make a difference in the fact that both genders get genitalia mutilated.

VoodooIdol said it better than I can.

This is both true and untrue. There are varying degrees of female circumcision (and let's use this term - unless you're also willing to use the term "male genital mutilation") that range from just removing the hood, hood & labia, and worse. Male circumcision is much like hood or hood/labia removal. It causes similar types of sexual issues, is also done with no anesthetic, and can be performed by people with no medical license what-so-ever.

So there do exist ways in which females are circumcised in ways ranging from MGM-equivilant to utter distruction.

[–]catipillar 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

"It doesn't change the fact that it occurs in males in exponentially greater numbers, in "civilized" cultures with the approval of the state and the church."

That's true, and I can see why this would infuriate men entirely, especially when they grow up and feel anger over the fact that a sensitive part of their sexual anatomy was removed without consent. I can understand this sentiment 100%.

"At least female genital mutilation is pretty universally called "terrible" by any reasonable person."

This is why I felt the need to post here...I've seen many people on this subreddit try to trivialize it, and I simply can't understand why they'd feel the need. I'd argue that the FGM procedure is considerably more ghastly and damaging then MGM, however, it's quite horrifying that MGM is more widely socially acceptable, and occurs in higher numbers.

[–]PositiveBear 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ok good, you're a reasonable individual. That makes me happy to see.

I can honestly say I've never seen anyone on /r/MR try to trivialize genital mutilation but if you've seen it, I'll take your word for it and my response is: fuck those people. That's an ignorant, biased and bigoted viewpoint that's pretty unacceptable by any rational standard.

The gist of the MRM's point on this is as follows (and maybe other people can put it better): Yes, Female mutilation is pretty effing horrible and needs to be stopped. But it occurs in such a small percentage of women in the most back-asswords and worthless parts of the world. Meanwhile, 40+% of the male world is circumcised and that's only the parts reporting it in the "civilized" world. Both actions need to stop because they're done without the consent of the person the action is done on.

[–]TheRealPariah 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]catipillar 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheRealPariah -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]catipillar -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheRealPariah 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]catipillar 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheRealPariah 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]catipillar 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

Please see my previous comments for my lists of sources.

Listen, removing every element of sexual pleasure on a female's vagina is worse then removing the foreskin on a man's. Like I've said, I believe that it's worse for men because their mutilation occurs in higher numbers and is more widely accepted, however, the physical repercussions for women are higher. Also, I don't dislike male babies...I fucking hate babies in general. But I like and respect adults, (generally) which is why I don't think that procedures should be performed on babies that will negatively affect them when they grow up into people who's company I could probably like and enjoy, and thus empathize with.

"The same can be said for some "circumcisions" for some men"

Please don't ask other people for citations without providing any of your own.

[–]TheRealPariah 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]catipillar 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

These countries mutilate their women: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Tanzania, Togo.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

The extreme version of FGM is NOT incredibly rare. In fact, I have yet to find a source anywhere that isn't a Men's Rights webpage that says anything OTHER then the fact that it's VERY rare for only the clitoral hood to be removed. FGM is designed to remove a woman's sexual pleasure because it's done in societies that seek to subjugate women. I am not arguing that male circumcision is fucking stupid and should never happen; I'm not sure how many times I have to repeat that to you. I don't doubt that it diminishes, or in rare cases, could ruin a man's ability to enjoy sex, however, that doesn't change the fact that FGM is designed for the sole purpose of debilitating a woman's sex drive until it's either entirely gone, or so far gone that it's pointless.

[–]Metaphoricalsimile -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PositiveBear 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]catipillar 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 16 points17 points18 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sigtrap 12 points13 points14 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]nepidae 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PositiveBear -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]nepidae 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PositiveBear 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]johnmarkley 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PositiveBear 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]ValiantPie 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MRMRising 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]zaferk 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PositiveBear 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MRMRising 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TerriChris 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Metaphoricalsimile 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]PositiveBear 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]CandethMartine 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]PositiveBear 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]CandethMartine 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PositiveBear 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, I know, it was stupid. Thanks for the education though;it's nice to know there's people willing to do the research that I wasn't smart enough to do. I will say that with all the emphasis one hears from doctors about the topic, it's a little hard to take a step back from that huge number but like I said, thanks.

I found a couple of good things I wanted to share on the topic though.

1: Breast cancer received almost 2x the federal funding of prostate cancer, as well as being covered over twice as much by media groups (source: here )I am currently looking for the actual report to support this.

2: Breast cancer hits both men and women but the male side of this is totally ignored. It's a small amount but it's not like death in any case of negligible (Source: here )

3: >According to estimates from the National Institutes of Health, in the United States in 2010, 207,090 women and 1,970 men will get new cases of breast cancer, while 39,840 women and 390 men will likely die from the disease. The estimated new cases of prostate cancer this year — all affecting men — is 217,730, while it is predicted 32,050 will die from the disease.

(Source: here ) Of course, this is a news article, so it's only as good as its sources.

Which are here and here

These show that breast cancer affects women and men -less- than prostate cancer affects men alone, yet gets twice the funding (source: Point 1).

So while it's not as terrible skewed as I originally believe (1 in 8 women get breast cancer while 1 in 6 men get prostate cancer and 1 in 1000 men get breast cancer). The source for that, by the way, is Point 2.

[–]JeremiahGuy[S] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]dicipres 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ValiantPie 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TerriChris -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]firereaction 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]catipillar 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DevinV 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]twcaiwh 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Metaphoricalsimile -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]twcaiwh 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Metaphoricalsimile -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]twcaiwh 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Feminists Starting to Lose Their Cool
Author	JeremiahGuy
Upvotes	56
Comments	77
Date	March 14, 2012 11:33 PM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/qwxxz/feminists_starting_to_lose_their_cool/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/feminists-starting-to-lose-their-cool.1025912 https://theredarchive.com/post/1025912

Comments