Today, let’s pay a little visit to the Men’s Rights subreddit, where a FeMRA calling herself Super_Delicious is expressing her gratitude for the warm welcome she has received from the Men’s Rights movement. And then along comes a dude called Eryemil, who’s evidently not pleased with Super_Delicious’ not-fanatical-enough stance on circumcision.
![Super_delicious 12 points 22 hours ago (25|13) As a woman I'm glad I'm welcomed into a movement that helps the men I love. It's rather spectacular. :) permalink source parent save give gold hide child comments [–]Eryemil [-1] -8 points 22 hours ago (22|30) You have a very interesting definition of welcomed. Because here I thought most MRAs that actually know who you are (and I'm not sure many would) hate your guts or shun you. Go post in AVFM where the community is more personal and activism driven and see how welcome you feel. permalink source save parent give gold [–]Super_delicious -11 points 22 hours ago (16|27) No you're just a fucking cunt. No one here has to agree with every part of the men's rights movement to still support most of it. You're delusional if you think every person here agrees with every aspect of the men's rights movement. I bet he only reason you target me is because I'm the only one you haven't managed to best in a debate. permalink source save parent give gold [–]Eryemil [-1] 10 points 21 hours ago (13|3) Are you serious? Need I link you to our last exchange. There hasn't been single time when you haven't left the conversation and refused to address my arguments. Tell me, what's more likely; that you are more intelligent that evey single person I debate who haven't managed or that you are being intellectually dishonest? And for the record, I don't dislike you because you happen to disagree with the one subset of MR activism I am most passionate about. I dislike you because you are a hypocritical princess with a bloated sense of self-importance. permalink source save parent give gold [–]Super_delicious -3 points 18 hours ago (5|8) You mean the last exchange were I wouldn't debate your same tired arguments. And I also didn't want you to link me another picture of a dog dick. permalink source save parent give gold](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/superdelicious1.png?resize=580%2C563&ssl=1)
Argumentum ad Dog Dickum. That’s a new one.
The debate continues on like this for some time, if you can’t get enough of this brilliant intellectual interchange.
I found this exchange through a post on the AgainstMensRights subreddit, a much more welcoming place, provided you’re not a Men’s Rights asshole.
Me.
Wow, MRM/MRA has female cheerleaders!? This is totally appalling lol :lol:! I’m not aware of this Femra since I pretty much stay away from MRA stuff, but the reddit links look enticing for a morning shocker
Socialkenny: Yup. It’s a pretty straightforward phenomenon, actually–any time you get an oppressive culture, you’ll have a portion of the oppressed class that decides that they can improve their own lot by playing up to the oppressor class. So you have patriarchal women, racial minorities supporting the white majority, and so on.
Wait… wait… she’s not fanatical enough on the subject of circumcision? Sooo… given what I know of their stance on circumcision, she’s not opposed to it? Essentially the only single issue on which they really have a strong point that they actually care about, and she’s not on board with that… but is on board with most of the rest? She’s on board with the promotion paedophilia and rape apologetics; on board with the demonisation of women as manipulative gold diggers, whores and spermjackers; on board with its twin – the demonisation of men as uncontrollable monsters, for whom rape is their very nature, for whom toxic masculinity is merely masculinity… but she can’t get on board when it comes to protecting little boys from genital mutilation? What the fuck is wrong with this woman?
Rargh!
@athywren She could be against circumcision but not want to criminalize it. Or she doesn’t hate parents who want circumcisions for their kids with enough. Never underestimate tue ability of people to be assholier than thou.
There’s that “intellectually dishonest” thing again . . .
Fair point, Opium… kneejerking is a bad way to react accurately. Maybe she’s just opposed to bombing circumcision clinics? (Because, if the abortion debate has taught us anything, it’s that all clinics deal with one thing, and one thing only.) Still, how can anyone be on board with most of what the MRM stands for? Ick.
The MRA guide to determining if a woman is intellectually dishonest:
1) Are you a man?
2) If yes, does she disagree with you?
3) If yes, well there you go then.
^Sorry, that should be “if a female is intellectually dishonest”
I’ll stop spamming comments now…
From that debate it seems that she doesn’t see male cirumcision as ‘mutilation’, unlike female circumcision. Her stance on whether it’s still a bad thing remains unclear though. I guess not accepting the dogma that male circumcision is in all ways comparable to female circumcision is enough to become a pariah.
I love how he explicitly admits “I don’t dislike you because [actual disagreement on serious issues], I dislike you because [misogynist slurs]”. It’s not about any particular issue, and it won’t matter how much she toes the party line, it would never be enough. He dislikes her because she’s a woman (I’m sorry, a “princess”).
Join the supposed men’s rights movement, get called a “princess with a bloated sense of self-importance” when you disagree with a man. Yup, that figures.
Doesn’t female circumcision often involve having the clitoris removed entirely? Or is it more often removing the clitoral hood?
@sarahlizhousespouse
IIRC, more stuff is removed for most female circumcision than just the hood. i shall see if I can google info.
And they wonder why the most important human rights movement in the history of everything isn’t attracting converts in droves .
Okay, (TW: genital mutilation)
…
…
…
What I googled so far seems to be there can be partial or total removal of clitoris, or that plus removal of labia minora, or… this (i’m quoting because idk how to rephrase it)
from here
[trigger warning for description of genital mutilation]
sarahlizhousespouse: Nah, you’re correct, the procedure often misleadingly called “female circumcision” does involve partially or entirely removing the clitoris. It is sometimes also combined with infibulation, i.e. sowing/fusing most of the vaginal opening shut.
Just removing the clitoral hood is decided less awful procedure that some women opt for voluntarily to try and increase sensitivity. But that is not what “female circumcision” refers to.
Ninja’ed by Fade. Ugh, sorry to duplicate the description of this horrible practice.
That definition of infibulation almost makes it sound like no big deal… serious TW if you look it up in detail. It makes me sick to my stomach just to think about it, and I don’t even have any labia.
Btw, for the record, I’m not at all of the opinion that male and female circumcision are equivalent. They’re both genital mutilation, but fgm is just… brutal.
So, it went something like this?:
FeMRA: Thanks for the warm welcome, everyone! You guys are awesome!
MRA: Castrating bitch!!!! (sends picture of dog genitalia)
Did I miss the memo? Is it Opposite Day? Should I be wearing socks on my head and hats on my feet?
I love how he argues AVfM is a more threatening environment for someone with a dissenting opinion. But to him, that’s an asset.
Then the analogous practice on boys would involve the partial or entire removal of the head of the penis. *Shudder* There’s no way to pretend that’s not mutilation.
I don’t approve of automatic circumcision of baby boys at birth, but I’ve spoken with men who have had their foreskins removed because of repeated infections (and hospitalizations) as children. I can see the value of medical circumcision in select cases.
sparky, it may or may not be Opposite Day, but you should definitely do that in either case.
Oh, yeah, in cases of infections and extreme foreskin tightness, I can see the value of circumcision… blanket statements, obviously not great when communicating less-than-straightforward concepts.
@Athywren
I agree. I think it’s… eerie how it’s treated like the thing to do with little baby boys. It churns my stomach.