Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Latest blog entry - MILOgate

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by simpleman View Post
    Milo says he prefer circumcised men because he can suck those dicks better... you sure you agree?




    After all your "alarming" reactions... now you come to explain that cutting off parts of the penis of a baby is OK... like seriously dude, in this same page you claim that I don't understand child abuse... what is wrong with you?



    Then let it go underground, and put those assholes in jail... what is the problem with that?



    Yes organs are different... cut something from girls is bad cut something from boys is OK... anyone that thinks this is a double standard is a "retard"... and you say I need education...



    And that is your argument?

    I just happen to know a lot of female circumcisiced women, there is this native indians the Emberra People,
    https://www.theguardian.com/global-d...myth-misgiving

    And I can tell you, this women are very happy, they are FINE, and they are FUNCTIONAL, and very HEALTHY and have a lot of sex and a lot of children too... they all laugh at your face... I'm telling you... I know a lot of them.



    Like women that are circumcised as a social practice...



    Sometimes you're such a white knight... it is embarrassing...

    Why don't wait for the person to be of mature age so he can decide if he wants or not the circumcision? why is there a need to make such decision for a baby?



    As if the whole "Trump is a victim of the establishment" claim is not doing that job already...

    Ironically feminism have listen to this and they agree to the idea that circumcision should be a personal decision one should take about his own body... not a bunch of strangers talking about cutting parts of the body of someone else...

    Feminism seems to have take the issues seriously and they seems supportive of it to stop... so from all the list of issues MRAs have presented this is the one that have being taken more seriously than all the others... but then again.. what do I know? After all I decide to be ignorant when I say I don't have the 50+ hours to watch all the videos on a random youtube channel...


    I happen to think that circumcision is wrong. Doesn't matter if it's a boy or a girl or anything in between. It's wrong.
    FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
    It's time to call it out for what it is.
    == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


    The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
    http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by simpleman View Post
      So how is that public comedy working out for Milo? last time I checked nobody is laughing... But what do I know?
      The reason so called 'professional help' doesn't actually ever help men and boys is because it's based on a faulty secular progressive feminist ideological remit.

      As a result of this many of the TYPICAL ways in which men and boys typically cope are misunderstood and misdiagnosed.

      That means they are either -

      1) ignored
      2) misdiagnosed and mistreated as independent issues
      3) used against the male in question when it serves the feminist agenda to bury him (see Milo).

      Men and boys cope through dark humor, through deflection, through retroactive re-imagining, they cope through self medication via drink and drugs, they develop aggression and impulse control issues.

      The entire system as it's set up is designed to identify and mis-classify most of these things entirely. To label them as evidence of toxic masculinity and to attempt to medicate them out of the patient entirely, never once linking them back to the abuse that might be triggering them.

      This doesn't work. You create a manic depressive zombie without the energy to channel all his hurt and suffering into anything positive or productive. They are content simply to turn the destructive impulses inwards. As long has he's not having road rage incidents and punching strangers let him sit in his chair like a zombie until he expires. Just get him off THOSE 'bad' drugs and get him hooked on OUR 'good' drugs and call it a fucking day.

      THAT is what 'professional help' does to men and boys subject to it.

      It insures that boys and men who are already victims of someone or something else become victims of a feminist system as well.
      "Being a cunt doesn't make you wrong." ComradePrescott

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by simpleman View Post
        Milo says he prefer circumcised men because he can suck those dicks better... you sure you agree?

        After all your "alarming" reactions... now you come to explain that cutting off parts of the penis of a baby is OK... like seriously dude, in this same page you claim that I don't understand child abuse... what is wrong with you?
        It's not the same as FGM. Suggesting it is harms other MRM causes.

        Originally posted by simpleman View Post
        Then let it go underground, and put those assholes in jail... what is the problem with that?
        1) it's impossible to police
        2) Muslim migrant communities are already closed shops almost impossible to police
        3) Driving it underground will lead to more botches and more issues for men and boys

        If you do want to talk about increasing police over reach into Islamic migrant communities how about we do it in the name of some things that actually fucking matter like you know COUNTER-TERRORISM and ORGANIZED CRIME.

        Rather than checking little boys dicks.

        Originally posted by simpleman View Post
        Yes organs are different... cut something from girls is bad cut something from boys is OK... anyone that thinks this is a double standard is a "retard"... and you say I need education...
        I never said it's 'ok'. I said it's not the same. And banning is going to make the situation worse.

        And comparing the two things head to head makes supporters of men's and boy's rights look like retards.

        Originally posted by simpleman View Post
        And that is your argument?

        I just happen to know a lot of female circumcisiced women, there is this native indians the Emberra People,
        https://www.theguardian.com/global-d...myth-misgiving

        And I can tell you, this women are very happy, they are FINE, and they are FUNCTIONAL, and very HEALTHY and have a lot of sex and a lot of children too... they all laugh at your face... I'm telling you... I know a lot of them.
        That's funny. Because the FGM involves actually REMOVING the sensitive parts of a woman's sexual organs.

        Circumcision doesn't.

        Moreover what makes you think I give a fuck about FGM either? It's a feminist issue and I couldn't care less.

        It's illegal in western countries (though impossible to police effectively). I couldn't care less what people do in their own countries.

        Originally posted by simpleman View Post
        Why don't wait for the person to be of mature age so he can decide if he wants or not the circumcision? why is there a need to make such decision for a baby?
        For one thing the skin HARDENS in that area. Meaning the practice is MUCH more painful, risky, dangerous and potentially damaging for males over 12/13 than it is for boys and babies.

        If you make it so it can only be done on adults you drive the RISK factors UP. That's assuming you can police and enforce all your retard plans to ban being performed on minors and keep country on the underground black market you create. And assuming you can persuade tax payers to fund this shit while normal people need things that matter like healthcare and jobs and security and shit like that.

        There are pacific island communities in NZ that do something like a circumcision as part of a manhood ceremony for boys who are 13.

        Originally posted by simpleman View Post
        Ironically feminism have listen to this and they agree to the idea that circumcision should be a personal decision one should take about his own body... not a bunch of strangers talking about cutting parts of the body of someone else...

        Feminism seems to have take the issues seriously and they seems supportive of it to stop... so from all the list of issues MRAs have presented this is the one that have being taken more seriously than all the others... but then again.. what do I know? After all I decide to be ignorant when I say I don't have the 50+ hours to watch all the videos on a random youtube channel...
        Feminism is a secular progressive leftist ideology. If they support state policing of circumcision it's not because they care about men and boys it's because they support giving states more overreach into the practices of religious institutions.

        You wanna be one of their useful idiots? Be my guest.

        I've made my position clear.
        Last edited by Maxx; 02-28-2017, 03:01 PM.
        "Being a cunt doesn't make you wrong." ComradePrescott

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Maxx View Post
          The reason so called 'professional help' doesn't actually ever help men and boys is because it's based on a faulty secular progressive feminist ideological remit.

          As a result of this many of the TYPICAL ways in which men and boys typically cope are misunderstood and misdiagnosed.

          That means they are either -

          1) ignored
          2) misdiagnosed and mistreated as independent issues
          3) used against the male in question when it serves the feminist agenda to bury him (see Milo).

          Men and boys cope through dark humor, through deflection, through retroactive re-imagining, they cope through self medication via drink and drugs, they develop aggression and impulse control issues.

          The entire system as it's set up is designed to identify and mis-classify most of these things entirely. To label them as evidence of toxic masculinity and to attempt to medicate them out of the patient entirely, never once linking them back to the abuse that might be triggering them.

          This doesn't work. You create a manic depressive zombie without the energy to channel all his hurt and suffering into anything positive or productive. They are content simply to turn the destructive impulses inwards. As long has he's not having road rage incidents and punching strangers let him sit in his chair like a zombie until he expires. Just get him off THOSE 'bad' drugs and get him hooked on OUR 'good' drugs and call it a fucking day.

          THAT is what 'professional help' does to men and boys subject to it.

          It insures that boys and men who are already victims of someone or something else become victims of a feminist system as well.

          Girls like horses.

          If you're a man, think of yourself as a horse.

          If you're willing to pull her cart, plow her fields, and stand around for hours while she's inside shopping, then you're a GOOD horse.

          If you nip at her hands and try to kick her across the field because she's got the Elastrator in her hand, then you're a BAD horse.

          Get it?
          FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
          It's time to call it out for what it is.
          == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


          The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
          http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

          Comment


          • #35
            Because the FGM involves actually REMOVING the sensitive parts of a woman's sexual organs
            Circumcision doesn't.
            Not an accurate statement: https://www.facebook.com/Bloodstaine...62685777204778

            Driving it underground is not a moral argument. Saying girls have it 'worse' is not a moral argument. Removing parts that COULD be infected could be applied to any part of human anatomy.. including breasts, etc.

            Downplaying the risks of MGM on babies is not exactly moral either. MGM is, statistically, completely unnecessary. Medical records from countries that have never adopted MGM as part of their culture shows no differences whatsoever in penile cancer or HIV infections. Those excuses are simply justifications for the past.. for maintaining old cultural practices.. but they have zero moral foundations other than ignorance.. and ignorance is no longer an excuse for us today.

            Its tough to critique our parents.. or their parents.. and its part of the male psyche to create our own narratives to turn trauma into strength-building exercises... ie: what did not kill us makes us stonger... the male way of adapting to bad things done to us as kids. But that does not make those things 'good'.. they remain evil.

            I was circumcised.. my son is not. No medical need to remove his foreskin... and if he needs to in the future, as statistically rare as that might be, he will have a say in the matter.

            If you're not a parent of a son I really don't give a shit what your opinion is on the matter, so long as its not something your actively preaching on a corner or making a buck as someone performing the genital mutilation. I think that this is a moral argument that will win out in the end... like the abolishment of slavery.

            Our ancestors did all kinds of things to appease the gods.. their own anxiety really.. on their helpless children. We are much better now.. much much much better. We can improve, and we will, so long as we keep seeking the truth and not confirmations of our own false narratives and anxiety relief.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Iggy View Post
              The PURPOSE of FGM is the reduction of sexual sensation for women. To ZERO or close to it.

              That is neither the purpose nor the practical effect of male circumcision...therefore the compassion is erroneous.

              Originally posted by Iggy View Post
              Driving it underground is not a moral argument. Saying girls have it 'worse' is not a moral argument. Removing parts that COULD be infected could be applied to any part of human anatomy.. including breasts, etc.
              From my understanding the majority of issues arise in the wake of botches and infection.

              If you want to REDUCE the risk factors you do not advocate for fucking government ban.

              You collect and present data on the risks and work discourage the practice long term. You make a PERSUASIVE argument.

              It's not dramatic. It doesn't happen overnight. It takes time. And it's not very interesting.

              Sorry but central government on this and many other issues like it is not the answer.

              Banning things doesn't stop them. Doesn't cause them to vanish or cease to exist.

              This is one such instance where a ban will be almost impossible to enforce.

              When practices are legal they can be monitored and held to account for malpractice. When they are underground they cannot.

              This is simple logic.

              Originally posted by Iggy View Post
              Downplaying the risks of MGM on babies is not exactly moral either. MGM is, statistically, completely unnecessary. Medical records from countries that have never adopted MGM as part of their culture shows no differences whatsoever in penile cancer or HIV infections. Those excuses are simply justifications for the past.. for maintaining old cultural practices.. but they have zero moral foundations other than ignorance.. and ignorance is no longer an excuse for us today.
              I'm not down playing the risks. I'm saying the comparison to FGM is erroneous and gives MRM opponents ammo with which to dismiss and make a mockery of men's and boys rights and MRM concerns more generally.

              I can't stop people like you giving them that ammo if you are determined to. All I can do is advise against it.

              Originally posted by Iggy View Post
              Its tough to critique our parents.. or their parents.. and its part of the male psyche to create our own narratives to turn trauma into strength-building exercises... ie: what did not kill us makes us stonger... the male way of adapting to bad things done to us as kids. But that does not make those things 'good'.. they remain evil.
              I will happily critique my parents on a variety of issues. This is never going to be one of them. It's not a strength-building exercise. I can't help it if I didn't and don't regard something I've personally experienced as traumatic.


              Originally posted by Iggy View Post
              If you're not a parent of a son I really don't give a shit what your opinion is on the matter, so long as its not something your actively preaching on a corner or making a buck as someone performing the genital mutilation. I think that this is a moral argument that will win out in the end... like the abolishment of slavery.

              Our ancestors did all kinds of things to appease the gods.. their own anxiety really.. on their helpless children. We are much better now.. much much much better. We can improve, and we will, so long as we keep seeking the truth and not confirmations of our own false narratives and anxiety relief.
              I think there's a lot more pressing concerns with how we police the Islamic communities of the western world more effectively that we should be worrying about.

              Violent crime. Drugs. And counter-terrorism for a start.

              Circumcision doesn't adversely harm or impact the majority of males subjected to it.

              Comparing it to FGM does give feminists and progressives ammo to dismiss the rest of the MRM's concerns as being as absurd and misfounded as that one is.

              If you want to harm MRM causes by perpetuating that comparison be my guest. You'll be in good company among the MRA ranks. I realize that I can't stop you and others making this comparison.

              I realize that those of you that do so can't see or don't care about the damage you do to men's rights and men's issues when you evoke that comparison. If you did you wouldn't keep making it.

              If I think something is the wrong fight to pick I'm gonna say so.
              If I think advocating to for a ban isn't going to have the desired effect I'm gonna say so.
              If I think slowly working to overturn cultural practices while armed with relevant info is the less dramatic but far more effective approach I'm going to say so.

              The point of the story is that there isn't a consensus on this issue within the MRM.

              Feel free to conflate this issue with FGM if it makes you feel better, but realize that if someone like me doesn't take that conflation seriously be sure none of our political and cultural opponents are ever going to either.
              Last edited by Maxx; 02-28-2017, 06:25 PM.
              "Being a cunt doesn't make you wrong." ComradePrescott

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Maxx View Post
                That's funny. Because the FGM involves actually REMOVING the sensitive parts of a woman's sexual organs.

                Circumcision doesn't.

                Actually Maxx, it's a whole continuum of possibilities ranging from a literal symbolic pin-prick, in more "enlightened" modern situations, to removal of the hood of the clitoris which is completely analogous to what happens in males, to partial or complete removal of the clitoris and sometimes the labia as well.

                But it is a bogus argument, frankly, to think that one child is more deserving of their sexual anatomy than another. Or that one child is more worthy of protection than another.

                I understand your reasons for not pushing the issue or pursuing it over other issues-- but to try and make the distinction that one is worse than the other is-- pardon me for being so blunt-- a Feminist type of distinction. It is not my goal to take you to task over it, simply to point out that all children are born with what they have. It is complete and utter bullshit trying to rationalize cutting any part of it off.
                FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
                It's time to call it out for what it is.
                == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


                The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
                http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Maxx View Post
                  The PURPOSE of FGM is the reduction of sexual sensation for women. To ZERO or close to it.

                  That is neither the purpose nor the practical effect of male circumcision...therefore the compassion is erroneous.



                  From my understanding the majority of issues arise in the wake of botches and infection.

                  If you want to REDUCE the risk factors you do not advocate for fucking government ban.

                  You collect and present data on the risks and work discourage the practice long term. You make a PERSUASIVE argument.

                  It's not dramatic. It doesn't happen overnight. It takes time. And it's not very interesting.

                  Sorry but central government on this and many other issues like it is not the answer.

                  Banning things doesn't stop them. Doesn't cause them to vanish or cease to exist.

                  This is one such instance where a ban will be almost impossible to enforce.

                  When practices are legal they can be monitored and held to account for malpractice. When they are underground they cannot.

                  This is simple logic.



                  I'm not down playing the risks. I'm saying the comparison to FGM is erroneous and gives MRM opponents ammo with which to dismiss and make a mockery of men's and boys rights and MRM concerns more generally.

                  I can't stop people like you giving them that ammo if you are determined to. All I can do is advise against it.



                  I will happily critique my parents on a variety of issues. This is never going to be one of them. It's not a strength-building exercise. I can't help it if I didn't and don't regard something I've personally experienced as traumatic.




                  I think there's a lot more pressing concerns with how we police the Islamic communities of the western world more effectively that we should be worrying about.

                  Violent crime. Drugs. And counter-terrorism for a start.

                  Circumcision doesn't adversely harm or impact the majority of males subjected to it.

                  Comparing it to FGM does give feminists and progressives ammo to dismiss the rest of the MRM's concerns as being as absurd and misfounded as that one is.

                  If you want to harm MRM causes by perpetuating that comparison be my guest. You'll be in good company among the MRA ranks. I realize that I can't stop you and others making this comparison.

                  I realize that those of you that do so can't see or don't care about the damage you do to men's rights and men's issues when you evoke that comparison. If you did you wouldn't keep making it.

                  If I think something is the wrong fight to pick I'm gonna say so.
                  If I think advocating to for a ban isn't going to have the desired effect I'm gonna say so.
                  If I think slowly working to overturn cultural practices while armed with relevant info is the less dramatic but far more effective approach I'm going to say so.

                  The point of the story is that there isn't a consensus on this issue within the MRM.

                  Feel free to conflate this issue with FGM if it makes you feel better, but realize that if someone like me doesn't take that conflation seriously be sure none of our political and cultural opponents are ever going to either.

                  Circumcision for men is and always has been about controlling sexuality, just as in women. But they try and justify it with "health" or other bogus rationale. Here are few really good write-ups about both male and female circumcision, the history and extent of the practice for both sexes, and the ramifications to the individual, and the factors contributing to its continued practice. I've posted them around here before, but I'll be happy to post them again:


                  Boys and girls alike: An un-consenting child, an unnecessary, invasive surgery: is there any moral difference between male and female circumcision?
                  https://aeon.co/essays/are-male-and-...lly-equivalent

                  Female genital mutilation (FGM) and male circumcision: Should there be a separate ethical discourse?

                  https://www.littleimages.org/wp-cont...-Discourse.pdf

                  PODCAST: The Ethics of Infant Male Circumcision
                  https://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/ethics-inf...e-circumcision

                  FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
                  It's time to call it out for what it is.
                  == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


                  The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
                  http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by mr_e View Post
                    Actually Maxx, it's a whole continuum of possibilities ranging from a literal symbolic pin-prick, in more "enlightened" modern situations, to removal of the hood of the clitoris which is completely analogous to what happens in males, to partial or complete removal of the clitoris and sometimes the labia as well.
                    Ok fine. But the common type of male circumcision doesn't ruin the sex lives of males subject to it in the majority of cases.

                    FGM is an entirely different practice to which an entirely different organ is subjected.

                    Another side issue that I have with this entire anti-circumcision crusade among MRAs is that you are encouraging a bunch of insecure boys and young men to regard themselves as mutilated and somehow less than others when that's not right or accurate for them to regard themselves as such.

                    A minority might have issues due to botches but the majority will be fine. Unless people in the MRA manage to put a bunch of crippling insecurities in their heads with their bogus mutilation narrative. That narrative can end up doing more harm than the majority of circumcision themselves ever do.

                    Another reason why I can't possibly endorse the comparison with FGM and never will.

                    There are a million and one barriers today that prevent young men and boys from having health rewarding sexual and romantic lives today that I think it's worth focusing energy on.

                    Being circumcised isn't one of them.

                    Originally posted by mr_e View Post
                    But it is a bogus argument, frankly, to think that one child is more deserving of their sexual anatomy than another. Or that one child is more worthy of protection than another.
                    Actually it's comparing practices that is the bogus argument. You are free to make it but I repeat it HARMS the MRM.

                    It makes it easy for MRM opponents to suggest that the REST of our issues and concerns are as misfounded and bogus as this one.

                    You can't reduce it to the basics you have done.

                    Again I can't stop people making that argument but I will never accept that doing so benefits the MRM generally or in anyway shape or form or that it achieves anything other than -

                    -Petitioning government to drive the practice underground
                    -making insecure boys feel needlessly shitty about their TYPICALLY perfectly health sex organs
                    -Reduce the MRM to a joke in the eyes of our opponents

                    Originally posted by mr_e View Post
                    I understand your reasons for not pushing the issue or pursuing it over other issues-- but to try and make the distinction that one is worse than the other is-- pardon me for being so blunt-- a Feminist type of distinction. It is not my goal to take you to task over it, simply to point out that all children are born with what they have. It is complete and utter bullshit trying to rationalize cutting any part of it off.
                    It's not a feminist distinction. It's a BIOLOGICAL one.

                    I will not a support any 'ban' that I don't think anyone has the means to proactively enforce. I will not support driving something underground and putting more boys than before at risk of issues and complications for the sake of 'sending a message' via big government.

                    That's the worst possible kind 'activism'. The kind that makes the problem a million times worse while letting people supporting it pat themselves on the back and convince themselves they are 'doing something'.

                    Now that sounds a lot like what feminists do.

                    You don't change centuries old cultural practices by banning them. If you have data that highlights the risks and might encourage parents to reconsider their choice and you want to distribute that go right ahead.

                    You have to make VALID compelling arguments. And comparing it to FGM isn't a compelling or VALID argument it's a joke.

                    Like I keep saying if I think it's a joke what the fuck is the average feminist going to think ?
                    Last edited by Maxx; 02-28-2017, 09:27 PM.
                    "Being a cunt doesn't make you wrong." ComradePrescott

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      False Dichotomies.. arguing that because something is (arguably) less invasive does not make it less moral.

                      You change things in 1 of 3 ways... Arguments, Ostracism or Violence. If arguing morality gives feminists ammunition than there are only two solutions left: Ostracism or Violence. MGTOW is basically Ostracism. State is violence.

                      In regards to putting words into other's mouths... I didn't advocate for a state solution, I advocate for an argument or social ostracism. State laws don't solve a thing, they can't even keep drugs out of prisons.

                      I called you out on your claim that MGM does not remove sensitivity in a male's penis... which is entirely false. You moved the goalpost somewhat in your response by implying that Intent matters in genital mutilation, I would argue intent is secondary to actual effect . I could also call out your assertion that MGM has no long term effects, but we can save that one for another time. The research on this topic is significantly biased, so its hard to sort out the propaganda from the facts.

                      I also disagree with your assertion that MRA's fighting against MGM is hurting the 'greater good' cause. Feminists reputations and opinions is a commodity that is eroding steadily every year. The morality of removing parts of a male babies penis that is not infected or otherwise deformed is... lets just say for arguments sake... not 'growing' in popularity. Stopping male masturbation is also not a very high priority for society right now.. but it was certainly (in the western nations) a high priority for certain doctors to promote in the past, which has been recently rebranded as good for 'medical' reasons. MGM was to reduce male pleasure... just as FGM is to reduce female pleasure in Muslim and other nations.

                      Morality is not formed by consensus. Morality is based on objectivity, and cutting off healthy body parts is objectively evil. We don't remove things anymore that modern medicine can treat.


                      But all this boils back to Milo, and his ability to voice his ideas. I've known about Milo's advocacy for MGM for over a year now... and I've raised my voice against that particular thing... yet I agree with Milo on many other things...and I've raised my voice in support of those.

                      Milo has been slandered... no doubt... but that was as predictable as possible. He is a smart guy, he will adapt and either succeed to find another platform to keep speaking out or he will not.

                      I hope that part of his adaption is to deal with his own trauma... not with 'modern' voodoo pill-popper psychiatrists or feminist male-shamers.. but perhaps someone more suited to deal with his trauma. All it takes is 1 truely compassionate man with some morals of his own... Paul Elam rings a bell there.

                      I also hope Milo will be won over with argumentation that MGM is unnecessary and harmful... instead of ostracism or the violence of 'law'.

                      We don't need to toss out the babies with the bath water. Milo is just at the start of his public career... the Internet is still here.. still mostly uncensored... and the world of lies is having more and more trouble hiding.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Maxx View Post
                        You don't change centuries old cultural practices by banning them.
                        Actually, I've been simply attempting to talk to you about it. I'm okay with the thought that we don't need to suggest that circumcised men are "damaged", but let's not make any more "heroes" who need to "suck it up", how about?

                        The practice is abhorant and not because we're men and can take it or they're women-- it's abhorant because that's not how we were made. We don't go around cutting off our elbows just because they're sharp and pointy. To even suggest it is silly.

                        Let's just quietly put the practice to bed. Figure out some other way to celebrate "manhood".


                        To speak to another item you brought up-- I am not a woman, so we would need an actual FGM woman to have a real voice of comparison-- but a woman's clitoris is very, very large. A lot bigger than that little nubbin that people slice up or cut off. And while I'm sure it isn't pleasant when it happens, or desirable to have done, it *isn't* the entire clitoris that they remove. In fact, there is extremely strong evidence to prove that "vaginal orgasms" are really just internal stimulation of the clitoris as it's cura ("legs") wraps around the vagina and stimulates the woman through the action of stretching it open and closed. The other part is certainly good too-- I don't doubt it for a moment. But I suspect that simply cutting off the bit that sticks out, while painful and horrid and all the rest-- doesn't completely remove a woman's ability to receive sexual pleasure.

                        Perhaps one of the ladies here might want to chip in with their opinion as well.

                        I don't recommend FGM. And I also don't recommend MGM.

                        There is no reason for these barbaric practices to continue, or to try and quantify one sex's pain and/or loss (or whatever) over another's.


                        Sexual pleasure after Female genital mutilation
                        https://www.womenonwaves.org/en/page...tal-mutilation

                        Pleasure and orgasm in women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C).
                        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17970975

                        NIH.GOV Abstract

                        INTRODUCTION:

                        Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) violates human rights. FGM/C women's sexuality is not well known and often it is neglected by gynecologists, urologists, and sexologists. In mutilated/cut women, some fundamental structures for orgasm have not been excised.

                        AIM:

                        The aim of this report is to describe and analyze the results of four investigations on sexual functioning in different groups of cut women.

                        MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE:

                        INSTRUMENTS:

                        semistructured interviews and the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI).

                        METHODS:

                        SAMPLE:

                        137 adult women affected by different types of FGM/C; 58 young FGM/C ladies living in the West; 57 infibulated women; 15 infibulated women after the operation of defibulation.

                        RESULTS:

                        The group of 137 women, affected by different types of FGM/C, reported orgasm in almost 86%, always 69.23%; 58 mutilated young women reported orgasm in 91.43%, always 8.57%; after defibulation 14 out of 15 infibulated women reported orgasm; the group of 57 infibulated women investigated with the FSFI questionnaire showed significant differences between group of study and an equivalent group of control in desire, arousal, orgasm, and satisfaction with mean scores higher in the group of mutilated women. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in lubrication and pain.

                        CONCLUSION:

                        Embryology, anatomy, and physiology of female erectile organs are neglected in specialist textbooks. In infibulated women, some erectile structures fundamental for orgasm have not been excised. Cultural influence can change the perception of pleasure, as well as social acceptance. Every woman has the right to have sexual health and to feel sexual pleasure for full psychophysical well-being of the person. In accordance with other research, the present study reports that FGM/C women can also have the possibility of reaching an orgasm. Therefore, FGM/C women with sexual dysfunctions can and must be cured; they have the right to have an appropriate sexual therapy."
                        FEMINISM is a HATE GROUP - Feminists are HATEFUL PEOPLE
                        It's time to call it out for what it is.
                        == REJECT FEMINISM. EMBRACE HUMANITY ==


                        The World of Men - Men's Rights / MGTOW / Sites of Interest to Men
                        http://forums.avoiceformen.com/showt...nterest-to-Men

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Maxx View Post
                          1) it's impossible to police
                          2) Muslim migrant communities are already closed shops almost impossible to police
                          3) Driving it underground will lead to more botches and more issues for men and boys
                          1) Not really impossible, for instance we can train doctors to detect circumcision as a sign of abuse, so if a doctor see a boy, it is his responsibility to report it... but most importantly, we should have legal mechanism for the boy to sue his parents for the circumcision.

                          2) So?

                          3) Like everything else... but eventually they will learn to respect the body of the baby and stop doing it.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Maxx View Post
                            The PURPOSE of FGM is the reduction of sexual sensation for women. To ZERO or close to it.

                            That is neither the purpose nor the practical effect of male circumcision...therefore the compassion is erroneous.
                            There are many giving reasons why there is circumcision...

                            For instance the link i give you about the Emberra People, they practice female circumcision because they think women are superior than men, and they don't want to risk a woman to develope like a male, so they remove the clitoris as a way to emasculate the girl, to cut out of her any male impurity her body have and curve the risk of the clitoris growing too bit that it might become a penis.

                            And this is just 1 example...

                            But beyond all this, your point is illogical, accordingly to you child abuse is OK as long as it is done for the right reasons...


                            From my understanding the majority of issues arise in the wake of botches and infection.

                            If you want to REDUCE the risk factors you do not advocate for fucking government ban.

                            You collect and present data on the risks and work discourage the practice long term. You make a PERSUASIVE argument.

                            It's not dramatic. It doesn't happen overnight. It takes time. And it's not very interesting.

                            Sorry but central government on this and many other issues like it is not the answer.

                            Banning things doesn't stop them. Doesn't cause them to vanish or cease to exist.

                            This is one such instance where a ban will be almost impossible to enforce.

                            When practices are legal they can be monitored and held to account for malpractice. When they are underground they cannot.

                            This is simple logic.
                            So accordingly to you.. creating the legal instruments that prevent this to happen will not prevent it, but if there is not laws about this, then they can be accountable???

                            I'm not down playing the risks. I'm saying the comparison to FGM is erroneous and gives MRM opponents ammo with which to dismiss and make a mockery of men's and boys rights and MRM concerns more generally.
                            Showme an example of this mockery. Is there a blog or something?

                            Circumcision doesn't adversely harm or impact the majority of males subjected to it.
                            It does.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Maxx View Post
                              Another side issue that I have with this entire anti-circumcision crusade among MRAs is that you are encouraging a bunch of insecure boys and young men to regard themselves as mutilated and somehow less than others when that's not right or accurate for them to regard themselves as such.
                              But it is mutilation...

                              A minority might have issues due to botches but the majority will be fine. Unless people in the MRA manage to put a bunch of crippling insecurities in their heads with their bogus mutilation narrative. That narrative can end up doing more harm than the majority of circumcision themselves ever do.
                              How many people you think is in this minority? from 3 to 5 men in the world?

                              It's not a feminist distinction. It's a BIOLOGICAL one.

                              I will not a support any 'ban' that I don't think anyone has the means to proactively enforce. I will not support driving something underground and putting more boys than before at risk of issues and complications for the sake of 'sending a message' via big government.

                              That's the worst possible kind 'activism'. The kind that makes the problem a million times worse while letting people supporting it pat themselves on the back and convince themselves they are 'doing something'.

                              Now that sounds a lot like what feminists do.

                              You don't change centuries old cultural practices by banning them. If you have data that highlights the risks and might encourage parents to reconsider their choice and you want to distribute that go right ahead.
                              8 years of ban to the practice of shrinking heads by the Jivaro People... that is what it toke... 8 years... and the Jivaro People in the middle of the jungle virtually stop it.

                              You have to make VALID compelling arguments. And comparing it to FGM isn't a compelling or VALID argument it's a joke.

                              Like I keep saying if I think it's a joke what the fuck is the average feminist going to think ?
                              First result on google for that search:

                              http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/06/...eminist-issue/

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X