I am very confused about the state of genital mutilation in the West

[TheReal_ND]

This won't be a well thought out OP as usual but I think I have found a moral paradox. I would like to see some pro circumcision members on this board explain this.

How is it that male circumcision is considered perfectly normal here but female "genital mutilation" is considered abhorrent? Also why isn't it called "female genital circumcision?" Granted that I've read how some Africans do it and it is indeed mutilation but isn't the principle really just circumcision?

Now I'm actually aware there are some benefits to male circumsicion in the historical sense but these days there isn't really any real benefit unless you actually believe it makes it harder to get STD's. I suppose this could be true but realistically when I talk to someone that isn't very invested in it, (Americans. All cut to a man,) they argue it's more pleasurable for the female to give oral or something.

How is this any different from "female genital mutilation?" Also, if this is mutilating what is actually cutting your cock in half and attempting to turn it into a vagina? Is that not mutilation also? It seems like it would stand that if you consider body modification normal then so would be post op transsexual surgeries.

[Okeefenokee]

You thinking about my vagina is literally rape.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Covenant with God bro.

[Ex-California]

There's a lot of MRAs that are attacking male circumcision like female circumcision is attacked but they seem so SJW about it.

They have a point, but fuck.

Reminds me of Euro-vag people

[Speaker to Animals]

FGM removes the entire clit. It's not the same thing at all.

Circumcision done in the US for health reasons. It has nothing to do with religion. Circumcision drastically reduces your risk of getting infections.

Arguing against it is not what bothers me. What bothers me is when MRAs pretend like it's the equivalent of cutting off a little girl's clit. That's terrible optics for them and it makes them look fucking pathetic. It also ruins their argument entirely. Instead of opening with assertions that 80% of us are victims of the male equivalent of FGM, just come at people with a more rational tact.

[Speaker to Animals]

Honestly, from what I have seen online, outside of MRAs, the only people who openly oppose circumcision are new atheists because they are low-IQ morons who think it's done for religious reasons

[Ex-California]

FGM removes the entire clit. It's not the same thing at all.

Circumcision done in the US for health reasons. It has nothing to do with religion. Circumcision drastically reduces your risk of getting infections.

Arguing against it is not what bothers me. What bothers me is when MRAs pretend like it's the equivalent of cutting off a little girl's clit. That's terrible optics for them and it makes them look fucking pathetic. It also ruins their argument entirely. Instead of opening with assertions that 80% of us are victims of the male equivalent of FGM, just come at people with a more rational tact.

Unfortunately, I don't see them taking a more rational attack. A lot of what I've been seeing from MRAs looks like they've become the non-feminist version of SJWs

[Speaker to Animals]

FGM removes the entire clit. It's not the same thing at all.

Circumcision done in the US for health reasons. It has nothing to do with religion. Circumcision drastically reduces your risk of getting infections.

Arguing against it is not what bothers me. What bothers me is when MRAs pretend like it's the equivalent of cutting off a little girl's clit. That's terrible optics for them and it makes them look fucking pathetic. It also ruins their argument entirely. Instead of opening with assertions that 80% of us are victims of the male equivalent of FGM, just come at people with a more rational tact.

Unfortunately, I don't see them taking a more rational attack. A lot of what I've been seeing from MRAs looks like they've become the non-feminist version of SJWs

MRAs became feminism for men too. They want men to be treated with the same bullshit non-accountability and special treatment that women currently receive.

[StCapps]

Honestly, from what I have seen online, outside of MRAs, the only people who openly oppose circumcision are new atheists because they are low-IQ morons who think it's done for religious reasons

Or maybe they just want to enjoy sex more, seeing as getting circumcised reduces sensitivity and with proper hygiene and birth control, the disease angle is a canard.

Ever stop to think that many believe the trade off is not worth it? Nah, you just to demonize the opposition, by only highlighting the shittiest arguments of the other side instead, otherwise you can't win the argument, as usual. MRA's are idiots on this issue sure, but they are far from the only people who don't see male circumcision as the best option in many instances.

[DrYouth]

I got this from Wikipedia...

The ethics of circumcision are controversial. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the primary justification for circumcision was to prevent masturbation, which was believed to cause a wide range of medical problems.[2][3] Modern proponents argue that circumcision reduces the risks of a range of infections and diseases as well as conferring sexual benefits.[4] In contrast, opponents, particularly of infant circumcision, often question its effectiveness in preventing disease,[5] and object to subjecting newborn boys, without their consent, to a procedure they consider to have debatable benefits, significant risks and a potentially negative impact on general health and later sexual enjoyment.

The masturbation angle was interesting... I suppose it has been an utter failure in that department...