Men's Rights and the Catholic Church

[Mary_Gail_36]

Firstly, comparing male infant circumcision done in a hospital or done be a mohel for little Jewish babies to Female Genital Mutilation is not correct,

The two practices are not similar. I am sorry if it is explicit.

who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

Key facts

**

• Female genital mutilation (FGM) includes procedures that intentionally alter or cause injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. **
• The procedure has no health benefits for girls and women.
• Procedures can cause severe bleeding and problems urinating, and later cysts, infections, infertility as well as complications in childbirth increased risk of newborn deaths.
• About 140 million girls and women worldwide are currently living with the consequences of FGM.
• FGM is mostly carried out on young girls sometime between infancy and age 15.
• In Africa an estimated 101 million girls 10 years old and above have undergone FGM.
• FGM is a violation of the human rights of girls and women.

Procedures

**Female genital mutilation is classified into four major types. **

**

• Clitoridectomy: partial or total removal of the clitoris (a small, sensitive and erectile part of the female genitals) and, in very rare cases, only the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris). **
• Excision: partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (the labia are “the lips” that surround the vagina).
• Infibulation: narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the inner, or outer, labia, with or without removal of the clitoris.
• Other: all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, e.g. pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterizing the genital area.

The above practices are not similar to removing the foreskin on a baby boy.

The controversy existing on male circumcision is if it is medically necessary, if it is painful, if it is a choice the child can wait to make when he is older. And up until recent decades, in the US it was considered medically beneficial for boys.

It seems that evidence has shown that the idea that it is medically benefical might not have been correct. The idea that it is not painful might not be have been correct.

I would even say it is not charitable compare the two practices. Good parents have made the decison to have their sons circumcised.

 

[gam197]

originally** posted by silentfactor**
If a woman has a gun it doesn’t matter how strong the guy is unless he is Superman. Most of us are not Superman. Women are psychologically aggressive. Look up “teen shaming.” It is all female on female abuse. These are issues that need to be addressed

.

By the time a little girl is 2, she gets it. She knows to smile at daddy and he will take care of her She sees a male as stronger, more dominant.

I am not arguing the virtue of girls but feminists do and they are effective. They key into those issues - maybe it has to do with envy of males. I am no psychologist.

The Mens Right sites are the first that I have seen in having some positive effect and they are going for the right age - the female are already disallusion.

I saw on these forums, a mention of a female named" girlwriteswhat" - looked at her channel and she has quite a good following. Women like this mother figure. It may be in the DNA that girls yes, rebel against their mother but they desire a very very close bond with a female all throughout life not just in infancy.
Just my own thoughts.

Watch the tape on circumcision. Maybe they have got it all wrong and it will change.

 

[Nimzovik]

Firstly, comparing male infant circumcision done in a hospital or done be a mohel for little Jewish babies to Female Genital Mutilation is not correct,

The two practices are not similar. I am sorry if it is explicit.

who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

The above practices are not similar to removing the foreskin on a baby boy.

The controversy existing on male circumcision is if it is medically necessary, if it is painful, if it is a choice the child can wait to make when he is older. And up until recent decades, in the US it was considered medically beneficial for boys.

It seems that evidence has shown that the idea that it is medically benefical might not have been correct. The idea that it is not painful might not be have been correct.

I would even say it is not charitable compare the two practices. Good parents have made the decison to have their sons circumcised.

You see no parallels what so ever eh?

 

[LilyM]

Firstly, comparing male infant circumcision done in a hospital or done be a mohel for little Jewish babies to Female Genital Mutilation is not correct,

The two practices are not similar. I am sorry if it is explicit.

who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

The above practices are not similar to removing the foreskin on a baby boy.

The controversy existing on male circumcision is if it is medically necessary, if it is painful, if it is a choice the child can wait to make when he is older. And up until recent decades, in the US it was considered medically beneficial for boys.

It seems that evidence has shown that the idea that it is medically benefical might not have been correct. The idea that it is not painful might not be have been correct.

I would even say it is not charitable compare the two practices. Good parents have made the decison to have their sons circumcised.

Besides which, there was MASSIVE media coverage of the German court case last year where parents wanted to circumcise their son. And huge debate on the issue of male circ in general thereafter.

I know my own sister and her husband were very torn when considering whether or not to circumcise their son. So there is no lack of awareness of the issue among women.

 

[Nimzovik]

Besides which, there was MASSIVE media coverage of the German court case last year where parents wanted to circumcise their son. And huge debate on the issue of male circ in general thereafter.

I know my own sister and her husband were very torn when considering whether or not to circumcise their son. So there is no lack of awareness of the issue among women.

If such real awareness is extant- why is Circumcision still permitted?

 

[silentfactor80]

Besides which, there was MASSIVE media coverage of the German court case last year where parents wanted to circumcise their son. And huge debate on the issue of male circ in general thereafter.

I know my own sister and her husband were very torn when considering whether or not to circumcise their son. So there is no lack of awareness of the issue among women.

I think the real issue is why there is so much more veracity for women’s issues in this department than men’s issues. Some feminists, after receiving barbs from MRMs, decided that in order to not be seen as hypocrites they had to at least say something. You don’t however see women marching in the streets protesting circumcision like you see them doing for abortion or contraception.

You will here whole epilogues about women this and women that from feminists and then a “oh on a side note we can’t support circumcision. Good day everyone! Long live feminism! Down with patriarchy!” That is our point.

 

[LilyM]

If such real awareness is extant- why is Circumcision still permitted?

We are really aware of the harms of tobacco and alcohol too, they are still permitted. They are practices which are so ingrained in the culture that it is difficult to eradicate them, and so are tolerated despite the harms.

And male circumcision was, and is thought still by some, to have health benefits, and AFAIK is largely done for that reason where it is not for religious reasons. Which is a point of real difference with female circumcision, which has no such health benefits and never has had.

 

[TimeEntrance]

Nimzovik responds:

Indeed… what one marries and what one ends up with is often a different thing altogether married people tell me.

See here: youtube.com/watch?v=y7ot_nESusw

See how Feminism has so saturated the collective Psyche. that this link demonstrates how it is acceptable and even funny for such horrors!

youtube.com/watch?v=VKgwczruOSQ

I wonder just how many ‘True Sisters’ agree with such eh?

Reprehensible. Simply deplroable. Why were these women not taken off the T.V.?

Why!!!

I get it. Men have been so demonized by Feminists (It surely wasn’t men spreading thsi stuff!) that it is Politically Correct to marginalize men and spread such** Misandry**.

That’s the way things are, Nim.

I kind of agree with–I think it was Maria–who said you can lay most of the blame at the feet of men.

Many if not most of your contemporary alpha males, and those betas that want to be one of them, will support that kind of female reaction in the videos you presented.

I’m of the mind one would do best to find their own niche in life and develop their own future. With that in mind, one limits themselves to certain things and outcomes if they limit themselves to American women. That is a person’s choice. And they suffer the consequences.

I really believe one can find a woman that’s not going to toss hot grease on you or stab you or do something to really hurt you if she’s very upset with you. And you two are married to each other. But you have to be honest about some of the characteristics you see in the woman you’re getting to know or are dating.

The woman that may very well be a close friend, that may find you as a good husband for her, may well have a different nationality, ethnicity, and religion than you do (I mean the plural “you” and not you personally).

Trying to change America or American women is a waste of time to me. Better to pursue one’s financial wealth and personal happiness independently.

 

[gam197]

Maybe because as first Lady of France, she needed to be more “careful” in her speech. She isn’t just a regular person…her public speeches probably couldn’t have differed too much from what her husband’s political views were.

originally posted** by silentfactor80**
It seems to be public relations, not an actual censoring of views.
She can say whatever she wants as her speech is protected. I agree there was probably a PR component to it all but I think the fact that she had to apologize says something about the feminist movement’s use of punitive recourse.

originally posted by TimeEntrance
Trying to change America or American women is a waste of time to me.

It is not about American women vs, other women.What kind of comment is that? American women can be traditional. I think that is what we are seeing-a backlash. Look for the females who are homeschooled, who attended catholic schools K-12, and those who may be protestant but with a strong love of the Bible and great faith.

 

[silentfactor80]

We are really aware of the harms of tobacco and alcohol too, they are still permitted. They are practices which are so ingrained in the culture that it is difficult to eradicate them, and so are tolerated despite the harms.

And male circumcision was, and is thought still by some, to have health benefits, and AFAIK is largely done for that reason where it is not for religious reasons. Which is a point of real difference with female circumcision, which has no such health benefits and never has had.

Perhaps you should check this link out (mondofown.blogspot.com/2012/06/female-circumcision-health-benefits.html). Of coarse we think FGM has no health benefits because feminists wouldn’t allow any research to be done that may be seen as supportive of denying women pleasure. Too bad the same argument isn’t as strongly adhered to when it concerns men.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

If such real awareness is extant- why is Circumcision still permitted?

To quote a nurse thaat cared for my son, “This was a battle I could not win with my husband… He insisted that the baby get circumcised to look like him” The mother then insisted to be present to make sure that baby got was taken care of properly.

When my first was born, the pediatrician said that there was no medical necessity, some parents decide that dad and son should be similar.

Perhaps you should check this link out (mondofown.blogspot.com/2012/0…-benefits.html). Of coarse we think FGM has no health benefits because feminists wouldn’t allow any research to be done that may be seen as supportive of denying women pleasure. Too bad the same argument isn’t as strongly adhered to when it concerns men.

Are you saying that we don’t know of health benefits because feminists have surpressed research of FGM?

Please go and read my link again from the WHO, here it is:

Procedures can cause severe bleeding and problems urinating, and later cysts, infections, infertility as well as complications in childbirth increased risk of newborn deaths.

 

[TimeEntrance]

It is not about American women vs, other women.What kind of comment is that?

The video of a mainstream television show was of American women. This seems to be an American female thing joined in help with a good many European females.

This doesn’t seem to be as prevalent a thing with women in various parts of Asia for example.

There are just things in the United States that are not going to change. If anything they will only go further in the direction they are already in. I’m confident of that. I know that.

I’m pretty satisfied in my own trajectory. But everybody has to find their own way.

American women can be traditional.

I wasn’t really thinking about being “traditional” per se. Actually, I don’t think I much care about that. However, another man might.

I was thinking of more humanistic qualities. Certain qualities much more abundant in women of non-Western nations.

I think that is what we are seeing-a backlash.

Lol I found this a little humorous, gam, not laughing at you but just the notion. It reminds me of those in Gary, Indiana and Detroit, Michigan that think their (respectively) cities are going to return to some glory days.

I have to tell myself that about Milwaukee at times too. Part of me thinks about staying here forever to help make some investment into the city but then the wiser voice in me that does not want to face reality that much reminds me that if opportunity to leave comes, to take it for better shores.

Look for the females who are homeschooled, who attended catholic schools K-12, and those who may be protestant but with a strong love of the Bible and great faith.

To me all that stuff is superficial. And any woman raised Christian means little to nothing to me as she’s probably the spawn of Satan. I was thinking more Muslim or Hindu women from some place like Lebanon or India. And not because of their religion so much as their culture. Maybe that’s intertwined I don’t know.

I met a woman the other day pure Americana, older than myself, now working on her GED. She has the kind of physique I like. Very much so. She probably was reared Protestant too. But I’ve had to ask myself some questions.

There may be some Hindu woman in India built less physically attractive than her (or maybe more!) but who would make a better mother to my children (with her) and life companion. The Hindu woman might have a Ph.D. and be my better in many ways. She might be a professional that enjoys her work and earning her own income.

So, for me, this is not about “traditional” or “submission.”

But more importantly everyone has their own wants, likes, and their own life to live. Not everyone is seeking or wants the same thing. So, for another perhaps limiting themselves to Catholic or Protestant raised women is important for them (maybe right for them). If it doesn’t work out for them in the end then I guess… consequences of their choices and wants.

 

[FoxFanForty]

This entire thread sounds like a bunch of closeted-gay woman haters and self-loathing females sitting around trying to one-up each other with their misogynist baloney. Women being forced into the military?? No real man wants to see that - I’m happy to fight for the ladies. Women raping men? Please. You can’t force a hard on. You guys are pathetic. Grow up and accept your spot at the head of the table, as I assume you are white American males and haven’t told the world your’re gay yet (but trust me, everyone knows by your constant mention of lesbians and woman hating.)

 

[silentfactor80]

To quote a nurse thaat cared for my son, “This was a battle I could not win with my husband… He insisted that the baby get circumcised to look like him” The mother then insisted to be present to make sure that baby got was taken care of properly.

When my first was born, the pediatrician said that there was no medical necessity, some parents decide that dad and son should be similar.

Are you saying that we don’t know of health benefits because feminists have surpressed research of FGM?

Please go and read my link again from the WHO, here it is:

And who do you think influence WHO policy? Feminists! Yes, I am saying that. If you read the link I sent though the main argument was that NO ONE has the right to modify another’s body parts for any reason. If the foreskin was so unhealthy and bad for men, nature would have eliminated via evolution or we all would have died.

 

[silentfactor80]

This entire thread sounds like a bunch of closeted-gay woman haters and self-loathing females sitting around trying to one-up each other with their misogynist baloney. Women being forced into the military?? No real man wants to see that - I’m happy to fight for the ladies. Women raping men? Please. You can’t force a hard on. You guys are pathetic. Grow up and accept your spot at the head of the table, as I assume you are white American males and haven’t told the world your’re gay yet (but trust me, everyone knows by your constant mention of lesbians and woman hating.)

LOL! Please head to the nearest army office and register! You are right, no man wants to see that but responsibility comes with rights / privilege.

Your comment about male biology is also extremely ignorant. It is a biochemical reaction that you do not control. When the male body is stimulated in that spot in a certain way the result is an erection. Perhaps you should educate yourself (youngmenshealthsite.org/erections.html).

Your accusations also show a great deal of immaturity on your part.

 

[LilyM]

To quote a nurse thaat cared for my son, “This was a battle I could not win with my husband… He insisted that the baby get circumcised to look like him” The mother then insisted to be present to make sure that baby got was taken care of properly.

When my first was born, the pediatrician said that there was no medical necessity, some parents decide that dad and son should be similar.

Are you saying that we don’t know of health benefits because feminists have surpressed research of FGM?

Please go and read my link again from the WHO, here it is:

Wait a second - we want so much to eradicate FGM that we neglect research into its health impacts? Doesn’t compute - if FGM had health benefits they would be shouted from the rooftops, or at least the front covers of the newspapers.

 

[silentfactor80]

Wait a second - we want so much to eradicate FGM that we neglect research into its health impacts? Doesn’t compute - if FGM had health benefits they would be shouted from the rooftops, or at least the front covers of the newspapers.

Contraception and abortion have serious health impacts but why doesn’t that research get “shouted from every rooftop?” Anything that stands in the way of women’s pleasure does not get the public square.

You are also missing the main point. NO ONE (male or female) should be modifying another’s (male or female) body. As I said, if the foreskin was so evil, evolution would have dealt with it!

 

[LilyM]

Contraception and abortion have serious health impacts but why doesn’t that research get “shouted from every rooftop?” Anything that stands in the way of women’s pleasure does not get the public square.

You are also missing the main point. NO ONE (male or female) should be modifying another’s (male or female) body. As I said, if the foreskin was so evil, evolution would have dealt with it!

It does, at least in my neighbourhood. Cancer rates for one are skyrocketing and we know that is linked to contraception among other factors.

As with the harms of tobacco and alcohol, people just don’t want to give it up regardless.

And for the record I have never been in favour of male circumcision just as I am not in favour of smoking, alcohol abuse oR contraception.

I was telling you simply that the perceived health benefits are a major reason people circumcise. Doesn’t mean I agree with the practice but it does mean there is not such a straight corollary with FGM.

 

[gam197]

originally** posted by TimeEntrance**
This doesn’t seem to be as prevalent a thing with women in various parts of Asia for example.

You better think about this one. I know lots and I mean lots of Asian women who have recently emigrated to the US and one thing I know is that many are pro-choice, most voted for Pres, Obama on this issue alone

And I don’t know about Muslim or Indian women but I would look at the culture very closely. Catholics values are just that and finding someone who not only believes in the Bible but is willing to make great sacrifice in not easy.

American women take a bad rap.

 

[Nimzovik]

I think the real issue is why there is so much more veracity for women’s issues in this department than men’s issues. Some feminists, after receiving barbs from MRMs, decided that in order to not be seen as hypocrites they had to at least say something. You don’t however see women marching in the streets protesting circumcision like you see them doing for abortion or contraception.

You will here whole epilogues about women this and women that from feminists and then a “oh on a side note we can’t support circumcision. Good day everyone! Long live feminism! Down with patriarchy!” That is our point.

Yep! That about sums a lot up! Tokenism from Feminism. Lip service in regard to the Male sex. It highlights the fact that Feminism is a self serving ‘Special Interest Group’ under the guise of compassion, to speak plainly.

Their answer for Men’s issues is yet more Feminism!

Just another Ignored Male regards,
Nim.