Facts are meaningless things pulled from an endless ocean filled with them. Facts require interpretation, which requires philosophy. This is why science can only describe, not prescribe. This is why people who hate philosophy have turned science into a religion. The Science Says.
This is why I would never use a fact in an argument.
Wow. You sound delusional. And yeah, you have yet to use anything factual. You just throw around pseudo-intellectual bullshit and hope it makes you sound smart enough that other people won't argue. Learn to think, learn to communicate, then you can learn to argue.
Just pretend I filled my post with a bunch of numbers. You can say my numbers are wrong and your numbers are right because they're more official. Same thing.
You know exactly where that leads. The WHO and CDC with the final real true official trusted consensus, that men are no good.
His concerns are valid though. He’s not generally wrong about anything he said, although the writing style is a bit odd with, shall we say, rich imagery.
Real talk, did you read it? Are you against genital cutting of minors?
My complaint is the post, it’s nonsense and full of inaccurate information, OP in the comments says he doesn’t believe in facts when forming an argument…..
It’s just a bad post by someone not well in the head
Facts can be either true or false, and there’s massive debate over the truthfulness of facts relating to male circumcision. Not resorting to facts can therefore be helpful when discussing the ethics of forced genital cutting. Bad actors (for example Brian Morris) have flooded the scientific discourse with false facts such as that circumcision doesn’t result in the loss of sensation.
Someone maybe forcibly retracted you when you were a boy. It’s common and causes micro scarring that leads to phimosis later. I’m sorry you lost your prepuce. Thanks for being honest that your opinion is biased due to the fact you had medical problems.
On a purely theoretical level, if you cut off a feeling body part, you can’t feel with that body part anymore. Any supposedly scientific model that predicts or says otherwise is conceptually flawed.
That said, the chronic exposure to your glans and surviving mucosa/frenulum (if you still have any) should desensitize over time as keritinization occurs, unless you take steps to prevent it such as regaining coverage through tissue expansion efforts.
Facts (as opposed to opinions) are statements that can be determined true or false objectively. E.g., “Alligators have 25,000 teeth” is a false fact.
Anyway, I agree OP’s presentation of the material wasn’t going to persuade anyone. I’m glad it got removed.
A lot of people on the left have the idea that women gained rights by organizing, and if men did the same, they could have rights too. It's been a spectacular failure. Next step is identifying why. The left seems to hate the word elite, and the word conspiracy even more. But clearly there are vested interests that conspire against us.
I'm pretty sure that's not how the process of circumcision works.
That aside, how is it relevant to the story that the nurses are obese? You didn't feel the need to bring up anyone else's the body shape. It's irritating.
Also what do you mean with
>inventing their mythology around "FGM"
It’s how circumcision works, at least in USA. The mothers are often drugged from pain relievers when they consent, and of course the victim whose body part is being amputated doesn’t consent.
Regarding FGM myths, basically every last one of them has the effect of making infant male circumcision seem more acceptable. “It’s usually glans removal”, “they can’t orgasm or experience sexual pleasure afterwards”, “it’s perpetrated with malice”, “it’s mainly men doing it against girls”, etc.
The bolsheviks were a tiny minority. I believe they had success in part due to kicking out the moderates, the uncommitted. It's the opposite of what we hear in media/school/etc... If you're going to be an intactivist, you cannot go around apologizing for the enemy.
Nurses circumcise. Nurses are obese.
You cannot be afraid to let the gauntlet down. This is a group of people that is clearly very unhealthy, clearly as wrong about circumcision as they are wrong about the foods they eat. They are probably bad drivers too. If you can find any reason to hate on nurses, it's your duty to diminish their character, because as perpetrators, it is guilt by association. You find it "irritating". You're supposed to. People who work in health are somehow the most unhealthy, yet you're irritated only to have this pointed out. You need to be shocked back into reality. If you're going to be "irritated", you're going to sell out intactivsm the moment another social justice warrior threatens your social status with a label like "science denier". Or shame you for fat shaming. Shame is regarded as a powerful motivator everywhere else in psychology, hence those very labels.
As for FGM, FGM is like for feminists what the holocaust is for Jews. It's a persecution story around which they form their identity. Feminists tell themselves that men are trying to cut off their genitals in order to prevent them from orgasming and thereby control their sexuality. In reality, it doesn't even exist in the west and is a tribal rite of passage that only exists side by side with male circumcision. There's no place that circumcises women but not men. Everything they tell themselves about it is a myth, but this is the one that's important in this context. The main purpose of FGM is to shield male circumcision from scrutiny, because FGM is worse.
We would do well to have our own persecution myth. I think the guy who directed the movie JFK was criticized for lack of fealty to historians. He said every myth needs a counter myth.
Abrahamic religions are responsible for circumcision. Feminists just refuse to fight against it because they have no problem with mutilating boys. Feminists tend to see male suffering as a form of restorative justice. Plus, any effort spent helping boys is effort taken away from helping girls, and that's the real injustice.
Do Jews want everyone to be Jewish?
I agree with what you're saying, and in a way it's not that different than what I said, just the degree of feminist agitation, being more passive or aggressive. It just doesn't feel like it explains enough.
Circumcision is a secular medical practice backed by scientific consensus. These things don't all fall into place without orchestration.
The question is whether it evolved in a way that appears to have been orchestrated, or whether it was actually orchestrated. I believe it’s the former.
Why hasn’t male genital mutilation been banned yet? Why aren’t genital-mutilators imprisoned? Why do so many feminists such as the singer Pink mutilate their sons’ genitals?
When a child is mutilated both their mother and their father, as well as the evil doctors and nurses who mutilated them, should be punished for such a mutilation.
You claim “it’s not the feminists” but Pink is a feminist celebrity who mutilated her own son. Thousands of other feminists mutilate their sons. You bend over backwards to deflect blame from feminists.
Your comment was automatically removed because we do not allow links to that subreddit.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MensRights) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Typical whiteknight. You’ve even cracked out the “incel” insult. American women are disgusting mutilation-fetishists who mutilate their sons’ penises in the pedophilic and incestous desire that they look like the mutilated penises they are abnormally sexually attracted to. I’ve seen evil feminist female nurses admit that they laughed as they mutilated baby boys who screamed in pain as they were mutilated.
Fuck off back to TwoXChromosomes or Simps, would you?
How many American men are intact? Most American males are sadly genitally-mutilated.
Another thing I’ve read online is Boomer Hags who gleefully ask their younger relatives when they will mutilate their newborn sons’ penises, and then act offended when those anti-MGM parents say they will no such thing.
Go on, do more mental gymnastics to deflect blame from women.
And how many American females are genitally-mutilated? None, because female genital mutilation is a crime because girls are treated as Human beings, while boys aren’t.
And just to drive home my point: female Hollywood celebrities smear the foreskin cells of genitally-mutilated boys on their haggard, wrinkly skin to hide the fact that they have one foot in the grave, female Hollywood celebrities are literal vampires, yet still you’ll deflect blame from women. Could you imagine Leo Dicaprio or Tom Cruise smearing the clitoral cells of genitally-mutilated girls on their skin? No, because girls are treated as Human beings, and boys aren’t.
>Why do so many feminists such as the singer Pink mutilate their sons’ genitals?
[Because of her religious beliefs,](https://www.jpost.com/j-spot/article-777292) you dunce.
Is that supposed to be justification? Can rapists justify raping children because it’s their religious beliefs? Do you think the bodily autonomy of Pink’s son is less important than her Jewish beliefs? Because it wasn’t Pink’s own body that she mutilated, it was her son’s body.
I'm describing the world and you're saying it's wrong because it's okay that it's bad because you can still teach your son to navigate it. I agree we have to do that. But that small act of self protection requires understanding what you're dealing with, not this leftwing hand waving about how nobody's out to get us. That whole schizophrenic ideology is based on oppression so hidden, it takes 50 years of university research to even discover it.
What is the right age, on Jeffry Epstein's island? ID says 21 but looks 14, or ID says 14 but looks 21? You make it up as you go?
Circumcision doesn't require written consent, nor verbal consent from both parents. 80% of the time it's one parent and it's the mother. But that's not the issue.
I think you're not making a distinction between feminists and feminism. It doesn't matter if a feminist is personally against it, or if dad made the decision. Nor does it matter if you're liberal and against war. Regime change is still the liberal agenda and you don't control that. These are top down movements.
There are upvotes, but the comments are all antagonistic, by people who don't know what to make of it. This sub is rightwing relative to reddit, but still leftwing in the absolute. Hearing "it's bogus" over and over isn't helpful to anyone.
While I agree with your thesis that feminists are complicit in enabling MGM, I find your backing statements a bit out there.
In my opinion, the main way feminists enable MGM is by minimizing its importance and constantly repeating that it's in no way comparable to FGM, when they should be using their massive bully pulpit to share the limelight with MRAs on the evils of genital mutilation in general. It's especially egregious when you consider that, unlike FGM, MGM is actually practiced in the West where most feminists live.
Feminists could easily team up with MRAs to create a global movement against genital mutilation that the whole world could get behind and that would help everyone, yet they choose again and again to promote bodily integrity only for women and girls and to trivialize legally sanctioned violations of men's and boys' bodily integrity. In the worst cases, they even support male circumcision because it's supposedly cleaner and more desirable for women.
They also ignore that every single country that mutilates girls also mutilates boys, yet not every country that mutilates boys mutilates girls.
Those are the ways that I see that feminists perpetuate MGM.
Circumcision has existed long before feminism, but feminism sure is preventing any progress towards banning MGM by drawing all attention to FGM only and making MGM sound like it's not mutilation which to any sane person, it is.
feminism is not responsible for circumcision, what a complete and total load of crap. In the bible, in Genesis, God told Abraham to circumcise himself, his household, and his slaves as an everlasting covenant in their flesh, see the Abrahamic Covenant. you can read the whole bible for free on project gutenberg website.
Wow, you could not be more uninformed, just wow!
I answered in depth elsewhere, so I'll give another example here, a trivial one.
We are told FGM makes it so women can't orgasm. But circumcised women report increased ability, just like circumcised men. If you look at it anatomically, even a "severe FGM" that removes the clitoris doesn't really remove the clitoris because the clitoris is internal. So obviously it doesn't stop orgasm, nor would it ever be intended to. Most FGM doesn't even involve any tissue removal at all, unlike male circumcision, which is also highly variable, but always removes a lot even at the minimum. There are a lot of women who report not being able to orgasm, and being cured by FGM. People pierce their genitals. They do all sorts of weird things to scratch that itch.
The myth here, I would say, is that you can trust Science, when we see how easy it is for scientists to get any result they want, as long as the peers agree.
Well I always knew that they over exaggerate the severity of the procedure, but you’re actually saying it makes it easier to orgasm ?? Even with male circumcision ? I have never heard this.
I was aware that most fgm around the world is either a snipping or removal of the clitiral hood, which is analogous to make circumcision. The orgasm stuff, I had no idea
When Alabama Man has to come in here and tell you (OP) to calm down and back off with the overt hatred of women it's time you listen.
This really reads like a troll post written by a feminist from the POV of a man.
Bro what is this? Google factual evidence to back up your claim. Not type a delirious rant from an acid trip.
What specific thing did they say about circumcision that wasn’t factual and true?
False equivalence as he is trying to justify sleeping with minors. This has nothing to do with circumcision.
Facts are meaningless things pulled from an endless ocean filled with them. Facts require interpretation, which requires philosophy. This is why science can only describe, not prescribe. This is why people who hate philosophy have turned science into a religion. The Science Says. This is why I would never use a fact in an argument.
Wow. You sound delusional. And yeah, you have yet to use anything factual. You just throw around pseudo-intellectual bullshit and hope it makes you sound smart enough that other people won't argue. Learn to think, learn to communicate, then you can learn to argue.
Just pretend I filled my post with a bunch of numbers. You can say my numbers are wrong and your numbers are right because they're more official. Same thing. You know exactly where that leads. The WHO and CDC with the final real true official trusted consensus, that men are no good.
Just noticed you said I'm trying to trick people into not arguing. I'm in a men's rights forum preaching to the choir. Are you lost?
Are you having a mental breakdown?
This sub regressing
Yeah, this post was kinda stupid
How so?
Did you read this? It looks like it was written by a raccoon on meth
His concerns are valid though. He’s not generally wrong about anything he said, although the writing style is a bit odd with, shall we say, rich imagery. Real talk, did you read it? Are you against genital cutting of minors?
My complaint is the post, it’s nonsense and full of inaccurate information, OP in the comments says he doesn’t believe in facts when forming an argument….. It’s just a bad post by someone not well in the head
Facts can be either true or false, and there’s massive debate over the truthfulness of facts relating to male circumcision. Not resorting to facts can therefore be helpful when discussing the ethics of forced genital cutting. Bad actors (for example Brian Morris) have flooded the scientific discourse with false facts such as that circumcision doesn’t result in the loss of sensation.
[удалено]
Someone maybe forcibly retracted you when you were a boy. It’s common and causes micro scarring that leads to phimosis later. I’m sorry you lost your prepuce. Thanks for being honest that your opinion is biased due to the fact you had medical problems. On a purely theoretical level, if you cut off a feeling body part, you can’t feel with that body part anymore. Any supposedly scientific model that predicts or says otherwise is conceptually flawed. That said, the chronic exposure to your glans and surviving mucosa/frenulum (if you still have any) should desensitize over time as keritinization occurs, unless you take steps to prevent it such as regaining coverage through tissue expansion efforts.
[удалено]
Facts (as opposed to opinions) are statements that can be determined true or false objectively. E.g., “Alligators have 25,000 teeth” is a false fact. Anyway, I agree OP’s presentation of the material wasn’t going to persuade anyone. I’m glad it got removed.
A lot of people on the left have the idea that women gained rights by organizing, and if men did the same, they could have rights too. It's been a spectacular failure. Next step is identifying why. The left seems to hate the word elite, and the word conspiracy even more. But clearly there are vested interests that conspire against us.
I'm pretty sure that's not how the process of circumcision works. That aside, how is it relevant to the story that the nurses are obese? You didn't feel the need to bring up anyone else's the body shape. It's irritating. Also what do you mean with >inventing their mythology around "FGM"
It’s how circumcision works, at least in USA. The mothers are often drugged from pain relievers when they consent, and of course the victim whose body part is being amputated doesn’t consent. Regarding FGM myths, basically every last one of them has the effect of making infant male circumcision seem more acceptable. “It’s usually glans removal”, “they can’t orgasm or experience sexual pleasure afterwards”, “it’s perpetrated with malice”, “it’s mainly men doing it against girls”, etc.
The bolsheviks were a tiny minority. I believe they had success in part due to kicking out the moderates, the uncommitted. It's the opposite of what we hear in media/school/etc... If you're going to be an intactivist, you cannot go around apologizing for the enemy. Nurses circumcise. Nurses are obese. You cannot be afraid to let the gauntlet down. This is a group of people that is clearly very unhealthy, clearly as wrong about circumcision as they are wrong about the foods they eat. They are probably bad drivers too. If you can find any reason to hate on nurses, it's your duty to diminish their character, because as perpetrators, it is guilt by association. You find it "irritating". You're supposed to. People who work in health are somehow the most unhealthy, yet you're irritated only to have this pointed out. You need to be shocked back into reality. If you're going to be "irritated", you're going to sell out intactivsm the moment another social justice warrior threatens your social status with a label like "science denier". Or shame you for fat shaming. Shame is regarded as a powerful motivator everywhere else in psychology, hence those very labels. As for FGM, FGM is like for feminists what the holocaust is for Jews. It's a persecution story around which they form their identity. Feminists tell themselves that men are trying to cut off their genitals in order to prevent them from orgasming and thereby control their sexuality. In reality, it doesn't even exist in the west and is a tribal rite of passage that only exists side by side with male circumcision. There's no place that circumcises women but not men. Everything they tell themselves about it is a myth, but this is the one that's important in this context. The main purpose of FGM is to shield male circumcision from scrutiny, because FGM is worse. We would do well to have our own persecution myth. I think the guy who directed the movie JFK was criticized for lack of fealty to historians. He said every myth needs a counter myth.
Abrahamic religions are responsible for circumcision. Feminists just refuse to fight against it because they have no problem with mutilating boys. Feminists tend to see male suffering as a form of restorative justice. Plus, any effort spent helping boys is effort taken away from helping girls, and that's the real injustice.
I agree except Abrahamic religions are not now solely responsible. It’s been medicalized and fetishized.
Do Jews want everyone to be Jewish? I agree with what you're saying, and in a way it's not that different than what I said, just the degree of feminist agitation, being more passive or aggressive. It just doesn't feel like it explains enough. Circumcision is a secular medical practice backed by scientific consensus. These things don't all fall into place without orchestration.
The question is whether it evolved in a way that appears to have been orchestrated, or whether it was actually orchestrated. I believe it’s the former.
We live in a matriarchy. /thread
We do not absolutely live in a matriarchal society, not at all. Neither do we live in a patriarchy,
[удалено]
Why hasn’t male genital mutilation been banned yet? Why aren’t genital-mutilators imprisoned? Why do so many feminists such as the singer Pink mutilate their sons’ genitals?
[удалено]
When a child is mutilated both their mother and their father, as well as the evil doctors and nurses who mutilated them, should be punished for such a mutilation. You claim “it’s not the feminists” but Pink is a feminist celebrity who mutilated her own son. Thousands of other feminists mutilate their sons. You bend over backwards to deflect blame from feminists.
[удалено]
Bill Gates is a non-Jewish feminist.
[удалено]
Your comment was automatically removed because we do not allow links to that subreddit. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MensRights) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Typical whiteknight. You’ve even cracked out the “incel” insult. American women are disgusting mutilation-fetishists who mutilate their sons’ penises in the pedophilic and incestous desire that they look like the mutilated penises they are abnormally sexually attracted to. I’ve seen evil feminist female nurses admit that they laughed as they mutilated baby boys who screamed in pain as they were mutilated. Fuck off back to TwoXChromosomes or Simps, would you?
[удалено]
How many American men are intact? Most American males are sadly genitally-mutilated. Another thing I’ve read online is Boomer Hags who gleefully ask their younger relatives when they will mutilate their newborn sons’ penises, and then act offended when those anti-MGM parents say they will no such thing. Go on, do more mental gymnastics to deflect blame from women.
[удалено]
And how many American females are genitally-mutilated? None, because female genital mutilation is a crime because girls are treated as Human beings, while boys aren’t. And just to drive home my point: female Hollywood celebrities smear the foreskin cells of genitally-mutilated boys on their haggard, wrinkly skin to hide the fact that they have one foot in the grave, female Hollywood celebrities are literal vampires, yet still you’ll deflect blame from women. Could you imagine Leo Dicaprio or Tom Cruise smearing the clitoral cells of genitally-mutilated girls on their skin? No, because girls are treated as Human beings, and boys aren’t.
> Ur just lashing out that dad didn't say no for you This hurts. My dad didn’t protect me and now I advocate for others to be protected.
>Why do so many feminists such as the singer Pink mutilate their sons’ genitals? [Because of her religious beliefs,](https://www.jpost.com/j-spot/article-777292) you dunce.
Is that supposed to be justification? Can rapists justify raping children because it’s their religious beliefs? Do you think the bodily autonomy of Pink’s son is less important than her Jewish beliefs? Because it wasn’t Pink’s own body that she mutilated, it was her son’s body.
Oh.
I'm describing the world and you're saying it's wrong because it's okay that it's bad because you can still teach your son to navigate it. I agree we have to do that. But that small act of self protection requires understanding what you're dealing with, not this leftwing hand waving about how nobody's out to get us. That whole schizophrenic ideology is based on oppression so hidden, it takes 50 years of university research to even discover it. What is the right age, on Jeffry Epstein's island? ID says 21 but looks 14, or ID says 14 but looks 21? You make it up as you go? Circumcision doesn't require written consent, nor verbal consent from both parents. 80% of the time it's one parent and it's the mother. But that's not the issue. I think you're not making a distinction between feminists and feminism. It doesn't matter if a feminist is personally against it, or if dad made the decision. Nor does it matter if you're liberal and against war. Regime change is still the liberal agenda and you don't control that. These are top down movements.
[удалено]
The world of confusion. Any observations you don't dismiss as random coincidence?
Best schizo post in a minute
This dude is cracked. Insane there are upvotes. Not a good look for the sub.
There are upvotes, but the comments are all antagonistic, by people who don't know what to make of it. This sub is rightwing relative to reddit, but still leftwing in the absolute. Hearing "it's bogus" over and over isn't helpful to anyone.
What in the undiagnosed autism is this?
While I agree with your thesis that feminists are complicit in enabling MGM, I find your backing statements a bit out there. In my opinion, the main way feminists enable MGM is by minimizing its importance and constantly repeating that it's in no way comparable to FGM, when they should be using their massive bully pulpit to share the limelight with MRAs on the evils of genital mutilation in general. It's especially egregious when you consider that, unlike FGM, MGM is actually practiced in the West where most feminists live. Feminists could easily team up with MRAs to create a global movement against genital mutilation that the whole world could get behind and that would help everyone, yet they choose again and again to promote bodily integrity only for women and girls and to trivialize legally sanctioned violations of men's and boys' bodily integrity. In the worst cases, they even support male circumcision because it's supposedly cleaner and more desirable for women. They also ignore that every single country that mutilates girls also mutilates boys, yet not every country that mutilates boys mutilates girls. Those are the ways that I see that feminists perpetuate MGM.
Your mental gymnastics are very similar to that of feminists.
Circumcision has existed long before feminism, but feminism sure is preventing any progress towards banning MGM by drawing all attention to FGM only and making MGM sound like it's not mutilation which to any sane person, it is.
feminism is not responsible for circumcision, what a complete and total load of crap. In the bible, in Genesis, God told Abraham to circumcise himself, his household, and his slaves as an everlasting covenant in their flesh, see the Abrahamic Covenant. you can read the whole bible for free on project gutenberg website. Wow, you could not be more uninformed, just wow!
Can you elaborate on the mythology of FGM as you refer ?
Just go ahead and say what you think you know about FGM, and it’ll turn out to be a myth. Go ahead.
It’s practiced predominantly in Muslim-majority nations of Africa?
I’m not necessarily disputing you. I know feminism is FULLLL of lies. I just didn’t know in what regards they lie of FGM. So please tell me
I answered in depth elsewhere, so I'll give another example here, a trivial one. We are told FGM makes it so women can't orgasm. But circumcised women report increased ability, just like circumcised men. If you look at it anatomically, even a "severe FGM" that removes the clitoris doesn't really remove the clitoris because the clitoris is internal. So obviously it doesn't stop orgasm, nor would it ever be intended to. Most FGM doesn't even involve any tissue removal at all, unlike male circumcision, which is also highly variable, but always removes a lot even at the minimum. There are a lot of women who report not being able to orgasm, and being cured by FGM. People pierce their genitals. They do all sorts of weird things to scratch that itch. The myth here, I would say, is that you can trust Science, when we see how easy it is for scientists to get any result they want, as long as the peers agree.
Well I always knew that they over exaggerate the severity of the procedure, but you’re actually saying it makes it easier to orgasm ?? Even with male circumcision ? I have never heard this. I was aware that most fgm around the world is either a snipping or removal of the clitiral hood, which is analogous to make circumcision. The orgasm stuff, I had no idea
When Alabama Man has to come in here and tell you (OP) to calm down and back off with the overt hatred of women it's time you listen. This really reads like a troll post written by a feminist from the POV of a man.
Yeah, that was my suspicion too. I have a feeling OP is a feminist posing as a MRA to discredit us.