Saturday, June 5, 2010

A Feminist walks the talk (sort of)...

Nothing highlights the hypocrisy of Feminism (and Feminists) quite so much as when they endorse or support in any way, the circumcision of baby boys.

Bodily integrity is a central tenet of Feminism, encompassed by the words 'my body, my choice'. Which is why I have always found it ironic the Feminists of all stripes have repeatedly defended male infant circumcision to 'prevent disease', because 'it's easier to keep clean', and incredibly 'women like the looks of circumcised penises better'.

That last one is really popular...honest to God.

In nearly every instance, what is good for the Goose, is not good for the Gander when you're dealing with a Feminist, especially when talking genital mutilation.

Which is why it was quite surprising to see this:

"I am now firmly on the side against circumcision and only wish I had actually looked deeper into this before my sons were circumcised. I honestly went along with the crowd on it and thought it was just one of things you do to your sons, get them circumcised.

If one of our rallying cries is bodily autonomy and we'd raise all hell when AAP briefly decided to allow "nicking" of female newborn genitals, does being against male circumcision become a feminist issue on the grounds of bodily autonomy or is it the universal right of a parent to SONS to do with their child's genitals as they please?"

Of course, this is something our newly found 'egalitarian Feminist' only realized after it was 'too late'...

"Unfortunately when I made up my mind about it, it was already too late. He was getting circumcised at that doctor's appointment."

It seems from this line, that rather than cancelling an appointment to mutilate her son, she just 'went with the flow'.

While I would like to congratulate this woman on finally realizing that her son (a male) is an actual person too - she did so too late to avoid being responsible for her son's loss of approximately 28,000 nerve endings, a potentially crippled sex life (including erectile dysfunction - though we all know the Feminist 'sympathy' for men experiencing sexual problems), and a time in the future when her son is possibly going to hate her for what she did to him. Frankly, I hope he does. I can't think of a single instance where cutting up your son's genitals is anything but an evil act, and there is not one parent alive that does NOT know that circumcision is painful, debilitating, and medically unneccessary.

And yet, they still do it.

It's good to see Feminists actually having some integrity on some issues like this, though with the number of arguments supporting male genital mutilation in evidence, I'm also more than a little taken aback with the outright hostility to anything male...especially penises.

In my view, there should almost never be an instance where this type of procedure is allowed to be carried out. And under NO circumstances should it be done to 'make him look like his father', or 'keep clean'. And the WORST POSSIBLE reason to do it is to make it 'aesthetically pleasing' to women. Unless you don't mind slicing off clitoral hoods and inner labia to make women more 'aesthetically pleasing' to men...


  1. It seems from this line, that rather than cancelling an appointment to mutilate her son, she just 'went with the flow'.
    If she was really having doubts, she could have put the appointment on hold at the very least.

    I do not understand why parents have their boys circumcised. I've heard all of the reasons you've listed and many more than are just as ridiculous. To make matters worse, I know numerous parents who couldn't be bothered to go in the room while their son was being strapped down into the circumstraint. They couldn't bear to see him in such pain it was said. Such an attitude seems almost like some sort of emotional deficiency on the part of the parents. If you love somebody, you don't let them go through pain by themselves. You push your feelings aside and do not let them suffer alone. If you can't accompany your child for a procedure you've chosen to subject them to, that should be a big warning sign about the correctness of your choice.

  2. I wasn't aware that the mass genital mutilation of baby boys was the fault of feminism. I thought it was an old cultural thing harking back to the ancient Hebrew covenant with God. A very patriarchal society by the way.

  3. Hestia: Damn straight.

    Anonymous Feminist: I'm not blaming Feminists for circumcision, I'm blaming them for their hypocrisy in supporting Male Genital Mutilation, while telling men we 'have to' care about women's issues...

    There shouldn't be one single Feminist anywhere that supports circumcision before age of majority...that is, if they're REAL Feminists...

  4. I guess I've just never heard about the feminist platform endorsing circumcision. If you can give me some sources of prominent feminists endorsing circumcision I'd be interested.
    Saying that there shouldn't be one single Feminist anywhere that "supports" circumcision? Really? You expect that all "feminists" must hold the same beliefs in everything? No matter where they are from or who they are? What about the Jewish feminists? What about the Jewish Men's Right's activists? Are there any? Come on now. That's ridiculous. Are all "non-feminists" the same in every way?? You're grasping at straws here. I just can't respect this argument you are putting forth.

  5. You don't think that people are, in part, the product of their culture or religion or society? You really believe that all feminists are the same in every way and believe the same things and have the same experiences? What planet do you live on? IN my experience no two people are the same. Even if they identify themselves as belonging to a certain group, they are still individuals and their environment plays a big part in shaping them.
    Who are you to determine who is a "real" anything? Just as an example, there are groups of people within the Christian religion who don't believe in evolution. And there are other groups within the same religion who do. Is one more "real" than the other?

  6. I just don't think you can lump everyone into the same category and expect them all to be the same. I stopped thinking like that when I was six years old but you obviously still are stuck in that way of thinking.

  7. Your tendency to do this is all over your blog. If you get a comment that disagrees with you, or even just questions your logic, you immediately assume they are a radical feminist and you rant and rave about a bingo card. As if the only people who could possibly find flaws in your reasoning are those kooky feminist. Because they're all the same! lol

  8. I'm looking for the feminist platform endorsing the circumsision of male infants. Still can't find anything......

  9. Bodily integrity is central to the Feminist ideology, as embodied in the phrase 'my body, my choice'. This means that this meme is indivisable from Feminist ideology...unless, that is, one agrees that under certain circumstances women could/should be forced to carry out a pregnancy?

    You cannot agree that women should never be forced into parenthood as a matter of Feminist principle, and yet still bo OK with violating another's bodily integrity for something so peurile as aesthetics, or for that matter 'religious tradition'...especially telling is the 'outrage' at FGM, and the silence on MGM, from Feminists everywhere.

    And, for the record, this is about as close to an 'absolute' as exists in Feminist theory.

    For the record, anonymous posting has been disabled. Persona-up or fuck off.

  10. I just don't think you have the right to put everyone into little boxes and declare that they must all think and behave the same way. What an infantile way of thinking.
    There is a growing awareness that circumcision is unnecessary and harmful. Many of the people involved in the anti-circumcision movement are women. And many would call themselves feminists. I knew a woman who refused to circumcise her son. Her husband was Jewish and wanted it done but she refused and told him why. But I guess with your reasoning that she was taking away the father's rights. WHich is it? Can a mother protect her son or does that mean she isn't letting the father be a father? According to this blog, what she did was just one more example of the evil feminist influence that strips father's of their rights to parent. Or am I putting people into boxes by saying that? Do you see what I mean?

  11. Male circumcision was a Western norm. With time and knowledge, it's becoming less prevalent. It used to the be the Western norm for people to smoke cigarettes. It was even touted as healthy. Cornflakes were invented by Dr. Kellogg as a bland food that would lessen the urge to masturbate which was considered very unhealthy. Culture norms change with education. But there are still some women and men too who see circumcision as the normal thing to do for male babies in this culture. THat's sad but it's just a fact. It's not a despicable feminist plot against men. I just think your post targets "feminists" unfairly as the only people who are ignorant in this matter.

  12. Jax, For me personally, the silence that comes from certain groups who opposed FGM but not RIC is concerning. I've spent time in natural parenting circles and know well that there exist many mothers with feminist leanings who do not circ their sons. Just because such mothers exist does not make an official stance against RIC by feminist organizations any less troubling. Genital mutilation is bad, very bad, and shouldn't be simply a gender issue but a human one. The more voices that speak about the foolishness of RIC the better.

    The day my daughter was born, there was a story in the newspaper about a little girl who was circumcised. The parents were charged as this were a crime and feminist groups spoke out fiercely against this. That same day, had my child been a boy, I could have circumcised him with nobody to speak on his behalf. When I read the news story, I couldn't help but wonder why these same feminist organizations weren't speaking out for boys that day too. Are they not human too?

    I don't believe it's infantile to question why official organizations aren't speaking up about such an issue. If they were serious about equality they would. Those who are serious about actual equality would be wise not to let such organizations to speak for them and to refuse to label themselves as such.

  13. Typical Feminist apologist....because there exist exceptions anywhere, any statement cannot be true.

    Nice try, but seriously, the only place that kind of 'logic' is acceptable is in a Women's Studies course....

    For the record, you're going to have to stop characterizing things's not a 'plot', it's adherence to principles set forth by Feminism that encourage, or outright recommend, these behaviours.

    There is no more a cabal of Feminist leaders than there is a Patriarchy....

    Mind you, Feminists seem to love the idea of there being a Patriarchy, and blame 'it' (cause of course 'Patriarchy' can't simply be code for 'men'...not even though it is the most concise definition)...

  14. Incidentally Jax, I never once stated circumcision was a Feminist plot...merely the rank hypocrisy of proclaiming yourself 'equalists' working towards "equality", vehemently opposing FGM, yet standing idly by while many Feminists themselves subject their sons to the very thing they SAY they are 'against'.

    THAT is hypocrisy. Which is typical of a Feminist, since the entire ideology is built on lies and hypocrisy....

  15. I guess my mistake was assuming that feminism, like any other movement, was comprised of many different individuals with different points of view.
    I guess I was a fool to question you blaming feminists for not fixing everything that is wrong with Western culture.
    I'm also not sure what exactly a feminist is from your point of view. To be honest, I'm not even a woman. Can I be a feminist? I found a mens rights blog by accident one day and have been roaming around and exploring. I found yours and I've been questioning it. When I read something I find far-fetched and faintly ridiculous that's what I do.
    And maybe this hit a sore spot because I'm an uncircumcised man and I have a staunchly "feminist" mother who loved me enough to leave my genitals alone. She couldn't fix the whole culture but she took care of me and fuck you for downplaying that.
    I just don't look at the world the way you do. In stark black and white. With no room for the individual. With so much hatred and anger. I'm glad I don't look at the world the way you do.

  16. No, your mistake was in assuming I'm stupid. Of course Feminism is composed of a whole bunch of individuals. I believe I stated that earlier. I also believe you knew that...

    What gets me is all the Feminists who try and avoid culpability in anything a Feminist or group of them has done. It's as if all these people want me to believe there is no definition of Feminism in an attempt to make themselves as hard to nail down as Jello...

    All it does is look like someone trying desperately to be 'popular' and avoid looking bad...

    Oh yeah, and I don't give a rat's ass if you're male, or if your mother was a feminist. And fuck you for saying 'fuck you'.

    If Feminists stand for nothing in particular, then there is no such thing as a Feminist. If there is such a thing as a Feminist, then there are defining characteristics. One is not Feminist because they SAY they are any more than they are a cab driver, physicist, or artist simply because they say they are.

    Are you making a contention that Feminists have never demanded something they knew full well would trample on the Human Rights of men? Never once argued for special treatment for women? Never made baseless contentions about Gender roles that led to massive social upheaval?

    Or is it 'unfair' to characterize Feminists as having done all this evil because, you know, there's a couple Feminists out there that don't agree with the vast majority...?

    Your inability to comprehend something other than what you've been spoon fed to believe is not my problem. You find it 'faintly ridiculous' that someone would speak up for men. You also say you're a man.

    How about this, I'm doing this for men in the Western World. If you find it silly, I'll do it for everyone but you. Fair?

    Cause honestly, White Knights are no better than bootlicking pussy beggars, and I have NO time for them...if that's your spiel, you're wasting your time.

    P.S. I'd hate to go through life as priggish and self-satisfied as you. I'm glad I don't look at the world like you do. I might be forced to make snide comments to someone to make myself feel superior, rather than actually figure out what's going on...cause knowing is scary.

  17. I can see you are very intelligent. I've been looking at a lot of MRA blogs and yours is one of the most well-written. You're aligning yourself with some of the stupidest scum of the earth though. Look at this dumbass over at the Mens Rights Blog:

    In his most recent post this idiot says we should "vote male" regardless of political platform. We should do anything we can to avoid letting a woman take power. Yet, in the post immediately previous, he is applauding a female senator for highlighting the plight of the male victims of domestic violence. A woman who according to his most recent post should never have been elected. If being an MRA means throwing your brain out the window, thanks, I think I'll pass.
    But there ARE bad apples in every movement! I completely agree with you. Does that mean you bear responsibility for everyone else's actions or non-actions because you share the same fundamental views? I'm honestly curious. OR what about this guy?

    This site is full of blatant hatred. Yet he agrees with some of the same principles you do.
    As an MRA, are you responsible for the views of this douchebag? I don't think you are.
    As in every movement, feminism has it's wackos. I may have let my perceptions of men's rights be colored by some of the disgusting stuff I've read about it. And I may have let some of that disgust trickle out unfairly on your blog. I'm sorry about that.
    Just how far back would you go? Do you think women should have gotten the vote? I'm just curious.

  18. Well, first off I don't subscribe to your belief that I have no obligation to try and combat what I view as 'objectionable elements' to the MRM. What you fail to understand is, there is no guarantee I am right, and another is wrong. Because of this we engage in a lot of internal debate (as well).

    What happened in the Feminist Movement (nearly at the onset, actually) could EASILY happen to the MRM as well... Namely, the extremist haters will begin to set the tone of the debate.

    This is easily demonstrable to be more effective than 'tolerance', as evidenced by every single social upheaval since the dawn of time.

    The key to avoiding this situation is to quickly accept and analyze the MRA point of view as a legitimate alternative to the Feminist worldview. Adopting our principles is not a prerequisite or anything, but living within the letter of the law (never mind the spirit, that's too far removed from the current situation) would be a good place to start.

    The longer women are priveleged and canonized, the longer men are demonized and casually used - the more likely the 'extremists' are to win the debate.

    In short, the only thing continued refusal on the part of Feminists and women in general to accept and address Mens issues will accomplish, is a MUCH stronger 'backlash'. The rise of the MRM is 100% completely the fault of Feminism, and Female Supremacists.

    Some of us who have been trying to warn and persuade people like yourself are getting awful close to saying 'screw it, these assholes won't listen to a thing I say', and leaving. You may think this would be a good thing...

    But that's only if you don't consider what kind of MRA would fill the void.

    And if that happens, frankly whatever happens after is well-deserved.

  19. One other thing I should mention:

    The VAST majority of those of us in the MRM have even less interest in 'traditional Gender roles' than Feminists do... You see, we actually believe in 'equality', and think that in the face of everything done in the last 50 years, it's ludicrous to expect a man to 'provide and protect'.

    We believe that it is not only men who have to 'take up the slack' and we don't buy for a single minute the idea that 'a woman's work is never done'.

    Look at MRA sites again, you will see we have every bit as much vitriol for Chivalry as we do for Feminism. In fact, many of us see Feminism as being little more than legally enforced Chivalry taken to extremes.

    Which is why 'White Knight', 'Mangina', and 'Pussy Beggar' have the connotations they do... All of them involve selling men out to women for ultimately self-gratifying purposes.

  20. There is one key difference between the feminist movement and the MRM that should be considered in this debate. Feminism has big organizations and groups that set the stage and give out the marching orders. They are an organized movement with members who agree on many issues. This is not to say that every person who identifies as a feminist believes in every tenet put forth by, say NOW, just that there are organizations that have power and claim to be speaking a feminist viewpoint.

    At this point in time the MRM does not have such organization. Many, if not most, of the men you'll find on MRA/MGTOW forums and blogs can hardly agree on if we go back to the past or if we move forward with a new future. Due to this lack of organization and competing ideologies, the MRM does not have the power that feminism back when it first began and even less so now. There are precious few organizations that speak for the movement as NOW, etc did for second wave feminists.

    And if I may defend Factory for a moment, he has spoken out against more militant members of the MRM and debated with them about some of their nuttier and truly misogynistic arguments. Please let Factory and the other voices of reason provide you with your view of MRAs, not the more extreme faction. Elusive Waipiti, Paul Elam, Snark, Zed, Jack Donovan, Novaseeker, and Welmer are all good examples of men who provide much insight and sanity to the manosphere.

  21. Thank you for replying to my comments. I'm starting to understand what you are saying. And I have to admit, when I said I don't think you are responsible for what the fringe elements of the MRA are saying, I was wrong. When I think of what that ultimately means, it's horrible. I would hope that if I saw real wrongs being done by a group I identify with, I would speak out. I have found some horrible MRA blogs but I've also found some very impressive ones. Yours is one of those. And I see your point about the rational MRA members getting frustrated and giving up.
    I guess I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about gender roles. There is a lot I'm not familiar with on both sides.

  22. Thank you Hestia. I am trying to become better informed before I go flying off the handle.

  23. Well, I'm posting a series of links to MRm! magazine, which I encourage you to both read, and pass on to other people you know who may be interested.

    What you find just might surprise you.

    Issues one and two both tend toward the 'critical of Feminism' aspect of the MRM. Issue 3 brings in more PUA / Sexual dynamics type articles. Issue 4 deals with the relationship between Feminism and Chivalry. Issue 5 deals with social reactions to male sexuality, and the usage thereof to obtain power.

    And as a sneak preview to those who are reading this, Issue 6 revolves around suicide, Gender Politics, and the Male Pill.

    Hopefully, as you read, you appreciate that this is the first time I have done anything like this, and the progression of the learning curve is pretty evident in the design. If it looks amateurish, that's cause I am one. :)