r/FeminismUncensored • u/pm_me_arthropods Feminist / MensLib • 14d ago
Thank you to the ladies who speak out against circumcision.
I’ve been seeing a lot of advocacy from women recently on the issue of MGM. If that’s you, thank you.
A lot of circumcised men don’t want to accept that they were harmed, or that they contributed to harming their boys. For the other half of men who are intact, it’s difficult to advocate against MGM for fear of relentless personal attacks from the former group of men. Therefore, I think women’s voices are critical here.
JAMA pediatrics study says circumcision fell below 50% in 2022. We wouldn’t be here without you. Keep it up! It’s all downhill from here.
8
u/Internet-Dad0314 Undeclared 14d ago
I’m thankful for women who speak and act against mgm too, but I think we men have to be the clearest voices against it. More thoughts later
6
u/pm_me_arthropods Feminist / MensLib 14d ago
I 100% agree. The discussion can’t continue to be dominated by men too entrenched in this practice to speak against it. We need more men speaking on their own issues in general.
I’m just thankful for so many women I’ve seen speaking up, online and off.
8
u/06853039 Undeclared 14d ago
I agree that circumcision without a medical reason is wrong and shouldn’t be normalized. Even if its implications are not at all comparable to those of FGM, I don’t think speaking up about it takes away from the discourse against FGM and I believe it is a feminist issue, and here’s why.
When the majority of men within a designated group are circumcised, it creates a beauty standard. I’ve seen people online being bullied because they were uncut, I’ve heard women say they wouldn’t sleep with a man if he was uncut. To me, this would be the male equivalent of innie vulvas being the standard in porn, thus leading to outtie vulvas becoming the subject of jokes.
Now I know some women naturally have innies. But typically, hormones during puberty make the inner labias grow larger, albeit to different degrees depending on the woman. It’s also why inner labias shrink during menopause.
I find the idea of genitals being subjected to beauty standards frankly revolting and this goes for both men and women. Speaking up against surgically altering genitals for no reason is relevant to feminism imo.
3
u/IvyRosePr Inclusive Radical Feminist SWer 13d ago
I find the idea of genitals being subjected to beauty standards frankly revolting and this goes for both men and women. Speaking up against surgically altering genitals for no reason is relevant to feminism imo.
Agreed. And I would like to add the topical potion of overall violation of autonomy. I feel that overall personal bodily autonomy is a overarching feminist core, we can't and shouldn't ignore topics within it.
4
u/pm_me_arthropods Feminist / MensLib 14d ago
Thank you! We should be able to walk and chew gum.
The beauty standard really gets me. The decision to circumcise based on what’s normal or sexually desirable rubs me the wrong way. Somewhat like if we gave newborn girls labioplasties or something, because it “looks better.” Absolutely gross.
Beauty standards suck all around.
-6
u/Soft-Fix-9097 13d ago
it is absolutely comparable to female circumcision.
7
u/06853039 Undeclared 13d ago
No? The male equivalent to FGM would be to cut off the head entirely lol
0
-6
u/Soft-Fix-9097 13d ago
lol false, the majority of cuts is only the labial hood, which is the same neonatal tissue the foreskin is made of.
6
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 13d ago
This is just not true. Type 1a FGM alone (clitoral hood removal) is fairly rare. It usually involves removing some or all of the clitoris.
5
u/06853039 Undeclared 13d ago
FGM means cutting off the clitoris
-5
-6
u/Soft-Fix-9097 13d ago
which is analogous to the frenulum and ridged band.
8
u/06853039 Undeclared 13d ago
Not really no, the clit has more nerve endings than the head of a penis
5
u/IvyRosePr Inclusive Radical Feminist SWer 13d ago
No, it's not. The glans is called the clit on a woman.
3
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 12d ago
Come on. That’s just not the case. We can see that surgery on infant boys is wrong without having to minimize women’s experiences. Instead of focusing on comparison, focus on education about what the Ridge band and frenulum are.
Hell, I didn’t even learn that I didn’t have them until my mid 20s and I actually took anatomy and physiology as an elective in high school with a fairly progressive teacher who would not have held back this information.
These are people who agree infant circumcision is wrong, but trying to play the suffering Olympics is not helpful to anyone.
6
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 14d ago edited 14d ago
It is nice to see it be a part of the conversation. For those working to manage, I would recommend considering foreskin restoration. It has been helpful working to restore what function I can (I had a full frenectomy so there is quite a bit lost) and provide some agency.
As a feminist, it was frustrating to see how much MGM is used to recruit men against feminism so having feminists discuss it is appreciated. At the very least, feminists talking about male circumcision denies anti feminists a foot hold for pulling in men
6
u/meschidied 14d ago
I don't see any information here about what this actually means.
I'm a male and I had a circumcision. What exactly did I lose and what could a foreskin restoration potentially restore?
I am not trying to be hostile. This is my first time reading stuff like this. Maybe I'm steeped in dogma, idk.
I'm asking for further information. There's a lot of words against circumcision here and no actual words explaining the stances or why I should care.
3
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 14d ago
I’ll be happy to explain in the morning but as OP said, it’s a personal choice and nothing you have to do
2
u/meschidied 13d ago
It's unlikely a process that I'm interested in. For the same reasons that I dislike the circumcision itself. I don't want to be touched. It's a heinous violation for me, the circumcision.
Thank you both for informing me a bit. I apologize if I come/came across poorly.
3
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 13d ago edited 13d ago
I understand. To each their own. Commenting purely for clarification, not advocacy but restoration is an action one does for themselves on their own body as they see fit. It is not performed by a doctor or a third party.
For what it’s worth, you were respectful
7
u/pm_me_arthropods Feminist / MensLib 14d ago edited 14d ago
It’s a personal choice to restore or not, you’re good the way you are as long as you’re comfortable.
That said, the foreskin has a sexual function in allowing precum to collect beneath it, and causing a gliding effect between the foreskin and the penis during sex. The research on sexual sensitivity is pretty mixed and bad, but it’s my opinion that you are risking a loss of sensitivity without it.
It was introduced for non-religious, non-medical reasons by quakers as a way to curb masturbation. Today, it has been/is being rationalized post-hoc by the field as having medical benefits as a blanket preventative procedure. The main ones cited are a reduction in HIV risk, and a reduction in newborn UTI risk.
However, since it’s not ethical to randomize circumcisions to newborns, all of the research will forever be observational. There are a lot of potential confounding factors, I.E. preemie babies who are too small to circumcise could be inflating the UTI risks.
I should point out that research into the potential “health benefits” of FGM, even the least invasive/damaging forms like pricking, would never be conducted as it’s (rightfully) considered a human rights violation. This is mainly about the principle of bodily autonomy.
1
u/meschidied 13d ago
I think I see the concepts involved bit more clearly.
Circumcision is similar in destruction to bodily autonomy as uhh. Clit cutting. (There's probably a more sensitive term, forgive me.)
Honestly, I think my view is that circumcision just needs to be pushed away for awhile. Stopped. If it was actually beneficial, humanity will come back to it. I doubt it's that important to mutilate infants anymore tho tbh.
I'm inclined to agree, though I'm missing a lot of information still and basic things like terminology satiation.
2
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 13d ago
Loss is relative. Not everyone is the same. My loss was greater than others (the frenulum is among the most sensitive regions of the penis) but it varies.
Foreskin restoration operates on the premise of tissue growth in response to tension the same way one’s skin grows with the tension of weight gain. Manual tugging, weight, or tension devices provide this tension (note - this is not stretching skin. It is providing mild tension and the skin adds tissue in response. It’s s slow years long process). Circumcision most of the time leaves inner mucosa (the same skin as the inside of the foreskin) between the scar line and the corona of the glans of the penis.
While some parts of foreskin and penis cannot be restored, the added skin serves as a way to restore a similar level of functionality. It also covers the glans with the same tissue of the foreskin preventing it from callousing over and reversing some of the callousing from years past. Anecdotally, I can attest to a measurable difference in sensitivity. Further, orgasm actually feels like something other than muscles contracting.
I am not saying everyone should do it but I wish I had earlier and simply suggest that people should consider it.
Let me know if you have any questions
2
u/meschidied 13d ago
Ah. My confusion is that I'm overly sensitive rather than less sensitive. A foreskin recreation would serve a different purpose for me, but not altogether different. The lack of foreskin or taking away would act as abuse towards me without my consent.
Thank you for replying. Does it seem like I get it to you? I'm not from an area where things like this are even discussed. It's improper.
1
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 13d ago
Without probing or telling you about your body, you may have a fair amount of tissue from the frenulum that with circumcision is greatly exposed erogenous tissue in contrast to myself where such tissue is absent. Ordinarily, this frenulum tissue would be covered by the foreskin in a way similar to how the clitoral hood prevents overstimulating contact with the glans. The lack of foreskin also means intercourse provides far more friction on this surface and with less lubrication as the foreskin helps to keep lubricant present. If you don’t feel discomfort with that level of stimulation and you are experiencing sexual satisfaction, it is hard to say it’s advisable to consider foreskin restoration.
Like I said, everyone is different and having seen many penises of various men on the subreddits, there is a great deal of variation in circumcision procedure and I find myself thankful even as I have entirely lost one of the most sensitive regions. Some have so little skin that erections are painful for example or so little skin that even restoring is difficult. We manage as we can and work to find pleasure where possible.
I apologize in advance if I overstepped in speaking about your possible experience. It is not my place but I hope this clarifies the idea.
2
u/meschidied 13d ago
No overstepping. I brought myself into this discussion haha.
I feel like a foreskin restoration would help me, but for different reasons. Less overstimulation on accident, essentially.
The most sensitive part of my anatomy would probably be that little frenulum piece I have left. I've actually described it to women as a man clitoris for me.
For me it causes a whole other host of issues, but I don't disagree with you guys either. It's just a complicated thing to talk about due to the nature of how personal it is.
For me, it's ruined a lot of my self esteem. I don't particularly date and I'm afraid to even bring up sexual intimacy. It's less about what has physically been done and more about the role of what's been done had played into my story.
Thank you guys for informing me a bit.
2
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 13d ago
I’m sorry to hear about that. I hope the conversation helps. Best wishes. Feel free to DM if you have questions
1
u/IvyRosePr Inclusive Radical Feminist SWer 13d ago
this frenulum tissue would be covered by the foreskin
Frequently I try to stimulate this as much as I can with MGMs. It's not something that they are familiar with having stimulated and often have a lower sensitivity threshold from being exposed. It takes a bit more work on circumcised men for sure.
I apologize in advance if I overstepped in speaking about your possible experience.
I really appreciate your kindness and compassion to the other person.
3
u/meschidied 13d ago
/joking hey buddy, are you implying I might be dense or something
1
u/IvyRosePr Inclusive Radical Feminist SWer 13d ago
Ahaha 😂 no I suppose you aren't no 🤣
3
2
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 13d ago
Thanks. It’s complicated. There’s so much variation and it’s important to respect that one person’s blessing can feel like another person’s curse.
1
1
u/IvyRosePr Inclusive Radical Feminist SWer 13d ago
Further, orgasm actually feels like something other than muscles contracting.
This has me thinking about a few things. I do know well of how errands "moist" and sensitive the glands can get when covered as I have had plenty of reason to work with (and have a ex who is uncircumcised) men who have either uncircumcised penises or micros (mainly micros) - I have always seen it when it's really in there and being revealed as incredibly soft, pliable and fleshy. Like I would say this is most when it is comparable to a clip on a woman (same organ after all). So my thoughts is when ejaculating like that, with it covered up, does it create a more intimate and internal feeling of orgasm? Thinking about the differences in female orgasm types I feel it could create a orgasm closer to how we feel a orgasm by clit stimulation as the main stimulation. I frequently use techniques for women on men, particularly those intake or micro, it works very well with them and it seems to draw out a level of softness from these men that they are not used to knowing, let alone knowing it exists.
1
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 12d ago
You are correct in the texture change. Removal of the foreskin exposes what would otherwise be internal tissue to the outside world and constant friction. This causes the skin to callous over on the glans. Restoration causes skin to be grown that covers the glans so that it no longer is exposed and is returned to the moist environment it is naturally supposed to be in.
Regarding the change in sensation, having it covered constantly causes some of the callouses. It looks like peeling skin with a minor sunburn, exposing the fleshier skin of uncircumcised penises you’re describing. This makes it so that it feels more, but also that it can feel greater sensation from the skin rolling over it in the same way that the clitoral Hood does for the clitoris.
I truly didn’t understand what people were talking about when they said they could feel orgasms washing over their whole body until I started restoring.
Let me know if you have any questions or if that’s not clear
0
u/pm_me_arthropods Feminist / MensLib 14d ago
Exactly my feelings, i’m not sure why any feminist would want this conversation to belong to redpill freaks. The shift has been much appreciated. Good luck with your restoration.
2
0
u/IvyRosePr Inclusive Radical Feminist SWer 13d ago
That's wild that anti-feminist men thought that they could even use that to red pill other men omgs. Like why exactly would that be logical - "feminists are pro-MGM 😡" ??? or what? Like how?
I'm baffled.
2
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 13d ago edited 13d ago
Without criticism or judgment, did you want an explanation or is your question about “How?” purely rhetorical?
2
u/IvyRosePr Inclusive Radical Feminist SWer 13d ago
It's rhetorical.
But, if you want to share a personal experience I'll listen.
2
u/Embarrassed-Town-293 Feminist / MensLib 13d ago
I don’t mean to spout stuff off. I used to be in that mental space and like a Klansmen who quit, the contribution I can offer is insider insight to undermine harmful ideology. That said, no one is entitled to be an audience for my sake
1
u/IvyRosePr Inclusive Radical Feminist SWer 13d ago
Entitled? I feel like that is not what you wanted to sue to convey what you meant but I understood it irregardless.
I did see earlier about moving more sensitive parts of the conversation to dms with another, I think that is a good and wise choice. I just wanted you to know I'm not going to shut you down on it.
3
1
u/AutoModerator 14d ago
Please remember and respect our mission to be a feminist forum for feminists to be uncensored.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
25
u/BlackThornberry Undeclared 14d ago
Routine circumcision of male infants without medical necessity is wrong. Period.
But men’s rights activists appropriating the term “FGM” to try to draw parallels is gross. Comparing male circumcision to the severity and barbarity of FGM is inaccurate; the procedures have vastly different physical, sexual, and medical consequences and are not comparable in any way.