The Red Pill

[donttread]

Saw a very interesting flick the other night:



It's about the so-called "Men's Rights Movement", and includes discussions about legal rights, parental rights, and the one that really blew me away, "male genital mutilation" - circumcision. Naturally, the feminist left goes nuts over the idea that men might actually be victims of anything because they are the "oppressors". I believe this is on Amazon video right now. It turns everything you thought about the feminist movement (and on a larger scale, everything the political left has been telling you) on it's head.

Circumcsion is multilation. It does not destroy the ability to experience pleasure later in life so it is not as bad as what some Muslim families do to young girls. But it is most definitely genital mulitilation and needs to stop.

[Ann Fann]

Circumcsion is multilation. It does not destroy the ability to experience pleasure later in life so it is not as bad as what some Muslim families do to young girls. But it is most definitely genital mulitilation and needs to stop.

I don't know, I was never circumcised, I was born very premature and at the time I didn't have much chance of living but they did their best and I pulled through, but I still got past the circumcision part intact. My stepson claims that he has lost some sensation. I don't now how he knows that anymore than I would know what being circumcised is like, but that's his story. But it is interesting that in the west we have been mutilating the genitals of our boys for a hundreds of years and never stopped to think that it might be a problem or whether it's even necessary. Freud thought that it was psychologically harmful.

But you're right, it does need to stop.

[Adelaide]

I don't know, I was never circumcised, I was born very premature and at the time I didn't have much chance of living but they did their best and I pulled through, but I still got past the circumcision part intact. My stepson claims that he has lost some sensation. I don't now how he knows that anymore than I would know what being circumcised is like, but that's his story. But it is interesting that in the west we have been mutilating the genitals of our boys for a hundreds of years and never stopped to think that it might be a problem or whether it's even necessary. Freud thought that it was psychologically harmful.

But you're right, it does need to stop.

The nature of the procedure leads to some loss of sensation. Apparently, there are a lot of nerves in the skin that gets removed.

I have spoken about circumcision negatively previously, more to make a point about female genital mutilation. Everyone gets riled up about female genital mutilation, with good reason, while completely ignoring that a lot of males get circumcised and not many people get upset about that. Our culture in the United States just sort of accepts it, cultural relativism, I suppose while condemning similar actions against women in other places around the world.

I would not say that this makes men victims, but it seems slightly hypocritical to criticize one practice while doing one that is similar. There is no scientific reason or health advantage to circumcising males.

[donttread]

I don't know, I was never circumcised, I was born very premature and at the time I didn't have much chance of living but they did their best and I pulled through, but I still got past the circumcision part intact. My stepson claims that he has lost some sensation. I don't now how he knows that anymore than I would know what being circumcised is like, but that's his story. But it is interesting that in the west we have been mutilating the genitals of our boys for a hundreds of years and never stopped to think that it might be a problem or whether it's even necessary. Freud thought that it was psychologically harmful.

But you're right, it does need to stop.

I always wondered if it didn't increase sensitivity. Once in a great while too much so.

[Peter1469]

I knew guys in my infantry days who got it done because of how much time we spend in the field. It is certainly worse to get it done as an adult.

[IMPress Polly]

Like any self-respecting feminist, I've seen this documentary before. Having involuntarily "met" many of these so-called men's rights activists myself online before, I can assure you that the version of the movement presented in this film is the most sanitized one possible; one wherein there is no sexual harassment or rape or death threats or hacking your friend's Facebook accounts to make it seem like everyone you love wants you dead. That's the real movement though.

The film relies on many poor arguments. For example, it blames women for war, as though it were not men who control the decisions to go to war and who have tended to ban women from fighting, and despite the fact that women are, statistically speaking, consistently more likely to oppose war, etc. It likewise blames women for workplace fatalities despite the fact that nearly all major businesses are owned by men and despite the tradition of only allowing men into the paid workforce. It likewise decries the fact that men commit suicide more often than women despite the fact that it's not for a lack of trying, as girls and women are three times as likely to attempt suicide and three times as likely to be depressed. It also blames women for rape despite the fact that even most boys and men who are sexually assaulted are attacked by other men. This is the kind of pseudo-logic around which the men's movement revolves.

What are the movement's goals? Well let's just say that I have seen no shortage of these people who call for things like banning women from voting, from working, from receiving an education, and even for the legalization of rape. That's the real movement. It's really not that egalitarian in nature. It's more like ISIS in America without bombs (for now).

[Mister D]

The nature of the procedure leads to some loss of sensation. Apparently, there are a lot of nerves in the skin that gets removed.

I have spoken about circumcision negatively previously, more to make a point about female genital mutilation. Everyone gets riled up about female genital mutilation, with good reason, while completely ignoring that a lot of males get circumcised and not many people get upset about that. Our culture in the United States just sort of accepts it, cultural relativism, I suppose while condemning similar actions against women in other places around the world.

I would not say that this makes men victims, but it seems slightly hypocritical to criticize one practice while doing one that is similar. There is no scientific reason or health advantage to circumcising males.

There is no consensus on the medical value of male circumcision or on its adverse effects. The American Academy ofPediatrics, for example, found that the benefits outweigh the risks but does not recommend it for all male newborns. They aren't alone. I'm not really interested in discussing the particulars or debating the benefits. I'm just saying that no consensus exists. The reason the two are perceived differently is that there is no medical rationale for female circumcision. It's a purely cultural/ideological procedure that is strongly associated by progressives with the oppression of women and, most importantly, it does real harm. There is nothing hypocritical about condemning female circumcision while approving of male circumcision. That said, Westerners should mind their own business and stop objecting to the customs of other peoples particularly when the supposed victims don't feel like victims.

[Mister D]

I knew guys in my infantry days who got it done because of how much time we spend in the field. It is certainly worse to get it done as an adult.

That's for sure lol

[Captain Obvious]

[resister]

Like any self-respecting feminist, I've seen this documentary before. Having involuntarily "met" many of these so-called men's rights activists myself online before, I can assure you that the version of the movement presented in this film is the most sanitized one possible; one wherein there is no sexual harassment or rape or death threats or hacking your friend's Facebook accounts to make it seem like everyone you love wants you dead. That's the real movement though.

The film relies on many poor arguments. For example, it blames women for war, as though it were not men who control the decisions to go to war and who have tended to ban women from fighting, and despite the fact that women are, statistically speaking, consistently more likely to oppose war, etc. It likewise blames women for workplace fatalities despite the fact that nearly all major businesses are owned by men and despite the tradition of only allowing men into the paid workforce. It likewise decries the fact that men commit suicide more often than women despite the fact that it's not for a lack of trying, as girls and women are three times as likely to attempt suicide and three times as likely to be depressed. It also blames women for rape despite the fact that even most boys and men who are sexually assaulted are attacked by other men. This is the kind of pseudo-logic around which the men's movement revolves.

What are the movement's goals? Well let's just say that I have seen no shortage of these people who call for things like banning women from voting, from working, from receiving an education, and even for the legalization of rape. That's the real movement. It's really not that egalitarian in nature. It's more like ISIS in America without bombs (for now).

I bet I was butchered by a barbaric feminist, if you go into "medicine" you could get your jollies on foreskin mutilation on infants.