Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Mens Rights Thread

1…2627293132…105

Comments

  • #1402
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    You'd have to have a dig into the studies that the metastudy chose and also look at the ones that it didn't. While metastudies are a valuable tool they're particularly prone to cherrypicking bias; in other words, pick all the studies that favour you anyway with one or two opposing ones for an appearance of balance and say the combined results are irrefutable. You also have the issue of comparing a process done in the first world to one done predominately in the third world. Preferably any study comparing fgm to mgm would compare population groups in the same country. Unfortunately there's little research done into mgm in the same places that fgm research takes place.
    Just off the top of my head I do think it's pretty well backed in research that it is associated with a small decrease in herp and hpv but that this is likely to be a hygiene issue rather than anything intrinsic to the surgery ie we need to teach young boys how to clean their penises properly. I thought it was also pretty well backed that loss of sensation and sensitivity was a foregone conclusion just going by the nerve makeup of the tissues involved.


  • #1403
    PucaMama
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,129 ✭✭✭PucaMama


    Sulla Felix wrote: »
    You'd have to have a dig into the studies that the metastudy chose and also look at the ones that it didn't. While metastudies are a valuable tool they're particularly prone to cherrypicking bias; in other words, pick all the studies that favour you anyway with one or two opposing ones for an appearance of balance and say the combined results are irrefutable. You also have the issue of comparing a process done in the first world to one done predominately in the third world. Preferably any study comparing fgm to mgm would compare population groups in the same country. Unfortunately there's little research done into mgm in the same places that fgm research takes place.
    Just off the top of my head I do think it's pretty well backed in research that it is associated with a small decrease in herp and hpv but that this is likely to be a hygiene issue rather than anything intrinsic to the surgery ie we need to teach young boys how to clean their penises properly. I thought it was also pretty well backed that loss of sensation and sensitivity was a foregone conclusion just going by the nerve makeup of the tissues involved.

    I agree with what you said. Didn't really think it was a huge help to prevent rose infections! And yes. It does make a lot of sense about the sensitivity issues. Maybe more hygiene issues in that idea could be worked into sex education in schools. Start early the way they do now and more people will be open to talking about it.


  • #1404
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,253 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    PucaMama wrote: »
    ..but there is no equivalence in terms of harmful long-term effects between slicing off a young girl's clitoris (and in 80% of cases, the entire labia minora as well) and removing a baby's foreskin.
    FGM Type 1a( removal of the clitoral hood or prepuce only) is and exact equivalence of circumcision.
    One is illegal and barbaric, the other common and socially acceptable.
    Unlike male circumcision, FGM/C has never been about health.
    Circumcision has never been about health.
    It's origins are based mostly on cultural and religious reasons.
    Proponents of circumcision are constantly trying to legitimise it by citing health grounds.
    but commandeering conversations about FGM/C in the name of male circumcision is seriously misguided.'
    If you view FGM on girls as barbaric and deplorable.
    But view circumcision as acceptable, then IMHO you're an out and out hypocrite.
    This is probably the point people are trying to make in these discussions.
    I believe the issue of non-necessary genital mutilation should be treated equally regardsless of gender.
    that bit in bold true? got it from a site linked in another post
    I haven't had a chance to read it, but I'd be very interested in knowing who commissioned the study.
    I find there are vested interests in propping up the "medical" reason.


  • #1405
    Maguined
    Registered Users Posts: 8,247 ✭✭✭Maguined


    The low complication of circumcision is due to the fact it is widely practised in the most developed countries with the most advanced medical standards and technology while FGM is most widely practised is third world countries with inferior medicine.

    I would wager western doctors could perform FGM with extremely low rates of complication however this would not make it acceptable. To imply the moral opposition to FGM is based on how complicated it is I find a bit disgusting as surely the crux of the issue is that a medical procedure without medical merit should not be allowed to be forced upon a woman without her consent. This same argument should also apply to boys.

    It also ignores the fact that low complication is not the same as no complications so some boys die every year to an unneccessary procedure. The human appendix is no longer required in the body and can lead to complications later in life that might require surgery however we do not perform an appendectomy on every child born as low complications are not enough to justify such a procedure that would still potentially cost lives. It is safer to wait until a complication arises so only those that require surgery get it. Circumcision is a surgery than can be peformed to alleviate some conditions so should be used as such instead of outdated religious and cultural reasons.


  • #1406
    Zulu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭Zulu


    This! Well put Maguined.

    I find it somewhat staggering that people seriously engage in the "degrees" of genital mutilation. Granted, when it occurs in the 3rd world in unsanitary conditions we can all agree it's barbaric, but none the less, why can't we all agree that the mutilation of ones genitals as a child is totally wrong and abhorrent - regardless of gender (or indeed development).


  • #1407
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    PucaMama wrote: »
    commandeering conversations about FGM/C in the name of male circumcision is seriously misguided.'
    This is a perfect example of the very kind of culturally received bias they claim to fight against. The writers are American and male circumcision in America is the cultural norm and has been for a long time, so they see it as "OK". Indeed it can be difficult to avoid it if you have a son in a US hospital. They'll lop of his foreskin as part of routine neonatal care. If the same medical services suggested removing the clitoral prepuce in newborn girls there would be a national outcry, yet still they claim it's entirely different.

    It gets even more ironic when you look at the reasons given for both practices. Tradition, religion, a non circumcised individual will feel different, "hygiene"(yep this is claimed by proponents of FGM too), the opposite sex prefers it, his/her father/mother had it done so they will too, it's my right as a parent etc etc.

    The biggest joke and irony in all this is in both procedures women are heavily involved in its continuing practice. In the case of FGM it's almost entirely driven by women in the culture, not men.

    is that bit in bold true? got it from a site linked in another post
    On the low complication aspect, well of course it's going to be lower than FGM. Circumcision on males is done under medical supervision in most cases. If FGM was done under medical supervision you'd see low complications too. In most cases it's done by untrained older women in downright filthy circumstances. The lowest complication levels of all would come from simply not doing either procedure in the first place.

    As for the preventing disease angle. IMHO that's a modern medicalised update of the old "hygiene" angle. The studies of same have had serious claims of bias attached to them. In any event there are far better ways to help prevent such diseases. Never mind that in some quarters it has been reported that circumcised men thought they were immune and became less careful. Look at another way. The aforementioned US has a high male circumcision rate, Sweden has a very low one, as does most of Europe. Compare and contrast the levels of HIV infection in the populations and see who has the lower. Hint, it ain't the US.

    Sexual function? The jury is still out on that one, or at least the long term effects. Most men are snipped after birth so comparisons are impossible. Of the men snipped in adulthood the vast majority are for medical reasons*. Their penis isn't fully functional and circumcision improves this, so they will naturally say it improved sexual function. In men who can compare the two states, the jury is still out as I said, though reports of lack of sensitivity increasing as the years go by is in the literature. Here's one study into it
    Adult circumcision appears to result in worsened erectile function (p = 0.01), decreased penile sensitivity (p = 0.08), no change in sexual activity (p = 0.22) and improved satisfaction (p = 0.04). Of the men 50% reported benefits and 38% reported harm. Overall, 62% of men were satisfied with having been circumcised.

    OK so 62% of men were satisfied. This leaves 38% who weren't and that's a pretty large chunk of them. Even moreso when you consider that in the vast majority it was done for medical reasons and their penis wasn't working correctly in the first place.

    Here's a Danish study.

    Circumcision was associated with frequent orgasm difficulties in Danish men and with a range of frequent sexual difficulties in women, notably orgasm difficulties, dyspareunia and a sense of incomplete sexual needs fulfilment. Thorough examination of these matters in areas where male circumcision is more common is warranted.

    Interestingly that study took into account the women partners of the circumcised.

    This ain't rocket science folks. Basic logic would suggest removing a large amount of nerve laden tissue is going to affect function in some way. It's pretty much that simple.





    *Even in countries where the practice isn't culturally engrained, like here in Ireland, the practice is still seen as the first port of call by doctors when there is a penis/foreskin function issue. You can see that in the thread on the subject in the forum. Alternatives are rarely if ever given and "doctor knows best" is the retort if surgical alternatives are suggested.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #1408
    nokia69
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,050 ✭✭✭nokia69


    circumcision and FGM are not the same, it won't kill you to say that one of them is a million times worse


  • #1409
    Maguined
    Registered Users Posts: 8,247 ✭✭✭Maguined


    nokia69 wrote: »
    circumcision and FGM are not the same, it won't kill you to say that one of them is a million times worse

    Is the morality of why they are objectionable not the same? The principle that a persons body should not have an uncessary procedure on the grounds of religious/culture?

    I completely agree that FGM is far worse in the after effects it has on women as it is frequently a far more invasive and destructive procedure on women. I am happy it is illegal in western developed countries.

    Do you think male circumcision being the lesser of two evils makes it acceptable? It won't kill you to say that on principle male circumcision is worse than not being circumcised.


  • #1410
    nokia69
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,050 ✭✭✭nokia69


    I think it is acceptable, it matters so little, I don't even care about it

    I just don't think circumcision makes any real differance in the modern world, if people want to continue it then meh

    one of the reasons I don't have much time for feminism is the massive deal they make out of minor issues, it makes them look stupid and ridiculous

    but when it comes to FGM they are 100% right, it needs to be stopped ASAP, in fact for a long time people have been pointing out to western feminists that they need to campaign more against things like FGM and forced marriage, than wasting their time railing against page 3 models and piss poor pop songs that they don't like

    so when a campaign to stop FGM comes along, men look stupid if they say but what about men and circumcision


  • Advertisement
  • #1411
    Zulu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭Zulu


    Of course there is a happy medium: leave men/women out of it altogether and simply stop the barbaric practice of chopping children's genitals for trivial reasons.

    If we look beyond our genders we can improve society for everyone


  • #1412
    Shakespeare's Sister
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,412 ✭✭✭Shakespeare's Sister


    Seriously? wrote: »
    The whole #womenagainstfeminism has really shown up the belligerent stance of modern day feminists.

    http://womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com/
    Women Against Radical Feminism I can completely understand and get behind, but Women Against Feminism... there are aspects to the F word that are still worthy of addressing. It's not always about putting men down or women having an advantage over men.
    Women Against Feminism is like Men Against MRA IMO. It fails to acknowledge the important issues these movements/ideologies address, which are of benefit to people. It's a bit too "100% with us or otherwise against us".

    Re genital mutilation: On male children it is absolutely barbaric of course, and baby boys are incontinent so going for a wee must be so painful. :(
    It should not be permitted, simple as.
    I don't see an issue with sometimes discussing each one separately though, as they come from different cultures. Some men (only men obviously, not boys) choose it too. Don't know if a woman would choose FGM.


  • #1413
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    Have been doing a bit of reading on the FGM and found a few things.

    Study on Senegalese prostitutes found that those who had had fgm performed had a "significantly decreased risk of HIV-2 infection when compared to those who had not".
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1442755

    This does not mean that fgm is a good idea.

    General population study in Tanzania found in "Tanzanian women, the risk of HIV among women who had undergone FGC was roughly half that of women who had not; the association remained significant after adjusting for region, household wealth, age, lifetime partners, union status, and recent ulcer."
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17320788

    This does not mean that fgm is a good idea.

    In particular, the Tanzania study reports a benefit many times multiple of the most optimistic reports I've seen into mgm.

    Maybe we should stop looking for "good" reasons to mutilate any infants genitals and just stop it altogether?


  • #1414
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    nokia69 wrote:
    circumcision and FGM are not the same, it won't kill you to say that one of them is a million times worse
    Then it wouldn't "kill you to say" that the neonatal removal of the clitoral prepuce in girls would be acceptable? I thought not.
    I think it is acceptable, it matters so little, I don't even care about it
    You do realise this is exactly what people where FGM occurs say and believe and can't understand outside cultures having a problem with it? It seems not, yet again.
    I just don't think circumcision makes any real differance in the modern world, if people want to continue it then meh
    Aaaand we have three for three. Have you read the studies? Do you not see the irony in damning one culturally accepted practice regarding the genitals of one gender, but fail to see the issue surrounding the culturally accepted practice regarding the genitals of the other gender? Simply put, you don't see it as a "difference" because it's culturally acceptable to you. Guess what those who feel FGM is culturally acceptable to them think? I'll give you a hint, look in a mirror.

    if I may paraphrase Zulu, let's just leave the bronze age ballsology of lopping of bits of people's genitals where it belongs, in the unenlightened past.

    And yea that includes the sacred cow of religion too. I would reckon if what passes for your god requires bits of fannies and dicks as a blood sacrifice I would suggest going out and finding a better class of deity, cos the one you have currently is clearly some sort of a crosseyed twat.
    Magaggie wrote: »
    Some men (only men obviously, not boys) choose it too. Don't know if a woman would choose FGM.
    In the cultures where FGM is practiced it is almost entirely driven by and performed by women, women who are most certainly part of the matriarchy within that culture. This is how it transmits. While such cultures are overtly patriarchal, in matters like this men have little enough say, it's "women's business".

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #1415
    Shakespeare's Sister
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,412 ✭✭✭Shakespeare's Sister


    Wibbs wrote: »
    In the cultures where FGM is practiced it is almost entirely driven by and performed by women, women who are most certainly part of the matriarchy within that culture. This is how it transmits. While such cultures are overtly patriarchal, in matters like this men have little enough say, it's "women's business".
    Oh yeh I wouldn't be blaming men or "the patriarchy" (not that I ever use that headwrecking phrase) for FGM.
    I'm just saying acknowledging there are differences in the two contexts doesn't mean being blasé about one of them. If there were a programme or article just about male GM, I wouldn't feel "And what about FGM?" The two issues are obviously similar, but can be looked at separately.


  • #1416
    Zulu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭Zulu


    Of course the different types of circumcision can be looked at separately, just like different level of FGM can be looked at separately. But siloed thinking is shortsighted and builds resentment.

    Put it this way: could this type of thinking lead to one gender ignoring a barbaric practice happening wholesale, on their own doorstep, while vehemently campaigning to stop a similar practice occuring on the other side of the globe? Simply because it's in their own genders interest?

    If we wish to build a more inclusive society for ALL our children, we need to leave the bunker mentality behind us.


  • Advertisement
  • #1417
    diveout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 746 ✭✭✭diveout


    Wibbs wrote: »

    In the cultures where FGM is practiced it is almost entirely driven by and performed by women, women who are most certainly part of the matriarchy within that culture. This is how it transmits. While such cultures are overtly patriarchal, in matters like this men have little enough say, it's "women's business".

    I'm just wondering what the consequences are for those women who don't enforce it or who had mothers who chose not to have this done to them.

    Even in our own culture for example, the mothers are desensitising the boys, and raising the girls to be scared of the male naked body. Even though it's women doing it, they too are in the cultural double bind. Over on another forum right now there is a talk about bringing a boy into the ladies room, well no one wants to touch the subject of dad's bringing a girl into the men's room.... ahem. I think it is so ingrained that the penis is something to be feared, it can't even be mentioned.

    In the US I have heard incredibly disparaging remarks about uncircumsized men and it is so accepted in the culture, that I think the disparaging remarks have even made it to television dialogue.


  • #1418
    Bafucin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭Bafucin


    diveout wrote: »
    I'm just wondering what the consequences are for those women who don't enforce it or who had mothers who chose not to have this done to them.

    Even in our own culture for example, the mothers are desensitising the boys, and raising the girls to be scared of the male naked body. Even though it's women doing it, they too are in the cultural double bind. Over on another forum right now there is a talk about bringing a boy into the ladies room, well no one wants to touch the subject of dad's bringing a girl into the men's room.... ahem. I think it is so ingrained that the penis is something to be feared, it can't even be mentioned.

    In the US I have heard incredibly disparaging remarks about uncircumsized men and it is so accepted in the culture, that I think the disparaging remarks have even made it to television dialogue.


    There are many different types of circumcision in both males and females. Suffice to say the type of male circumcision practiced in American hospitals is NOTHING like religious male circumcision. Whatever you think of it is by doctor in a hospital.

    Also historically it was very beneficial in ancient times when hygiene and medical practice was poor.

    Male circumcision is sometimes a medical necessity and that was more often historically. UTI's Balanitis it is also thought to reduce the transmission of STDS. Now with protection these are less problematic. But years ago in areas where circumcision developed they were rife and life threatening. Circumcision was praised for health reasons justifiably so. And it improved the general health of the male population. But living standards have improved and in the first world it is largely no longer necessary. But not everyone lives in the first world.

    Research has shown that men who are circumcised in childhood are three to four times less likely to develop penile than men who are uncircumcised.
    Sometimes there's a medical need for circumcision, such as when the foreskin is too tight to be pulled back (retracted) over the glans. In other cases, particularly in certain parts of Africa, circumcision is recommended for older boys or men to reduce the risk of certain sexually transmitted infections. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks. However, the AAP doesn't recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns.



    Female circumcision on the other hand has no health benefits.

    Female circumcision is done largely for male sexual preference. Miriam Martinelli and Ollé Goig write that the preference is for women's genitalia to be "flat, rigid and dry because it increases pleasure for men during intercourse. In the case of infibulation Infibulation is said by several sources to enhance male sexual pleasure; Gruenbaum reports that men seem to enjoy the effort of penetrating their wife's infibulation.

    The most extreme form involves the complete removal of the clitoris and labia minora, together with the inner surface of the labia majora. The raw edges of the labia majora are brought together to fuse, using thorns, poultices or stitching to hold them in place, and the legs are tied together for 2-6 weeks. The healed scar creates a hood of skin which covers the urethra and part or most of the vagina, and which acts as a physical barrier to intercourse. A small opening is left at the back to allow for the flow of urine and menstrual blood

    :(
    almost all cases of infibulation and in many cases of severe excision, defibulation must also be performed during childbirth to allow exit of the fetal head without tearing the surrounding scar tissue. If no experienced birth attendant is available to perform defibulation, fetal and/or maternal complications may occur because of obstructed labour or perineal tears.

    Female circumcision is performed largely for men. Not women or for the money practitioners get from it.

    Male circumcision at point in history made sense somewhat now less so except for some individuals. There was never a justifiable reason for female circumcision. Except for the sexual gratification and preference of men and it is MUCH more destructive.

    And it is largely MEN who promote female circumcision in cultures. It is also men who promote male circumcision traditionally. Particularly in religion. Religious leaders in Judaism and Islam are male.


  • #1419
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    diveout wrote: »
    I'm just wondering what the consequences are for those women who don't enforce it or who had mothers who chose not to have this done to them.
    Actual shaming up to social exclusion I'd imagine. It can happen in the male circumcision culture in the US, but add in any religious overtones and it's near game over. There are Jewish folks who are against the practice, but as you can imagine they get some flak for it.

    Historically Jewish men went through a blood rite involving the foreskin, but it seems it wasn't removed entirely. Ancient Greek writers spoke of Jewish men entering the Greek games who passed for locals. The Greeks(and Romans) considered the practice primitive and ugly(hence Christianity alone among the Abrahamic religions lost the religious drive for it). The Greek games were conducted naked so all was on show, so if Jews could pass for locals they were clearly mostly intact. This didn't last long as Jewish religious elders horrified at this increased the amount of tissue removed so they couldn't pass for Greeks.
    I think it is so ingrained that the penis is something to be feared, it can't even be mentioned.
    There is an element of that alright, more a fear of make sexuality in a way. Dunno how widespread it is though. Interestingly, or not, male circumcision was seen as a way to reduce male sexuality(just like FGM). It was seen as reducing masturbation(and used as a punishment for it) "cleaner", more "modern" less animal like, less dangerous. It really took off in the late 19th century among non Jews and Muslims, particularly in the anglosphere and Protestant nations. It would have been similar here and in the UK not that long ago. I know my mum got a little flack from her mother because I didn't get snipped and that was the 1960's. A good proportion of Irish boys born in say the 40's would have been snipped as infants. Most of the anglosphere world gave up the practice, but for some reason the US in particular kept it going.
    In the US I have heard incredibly disparaging remarks about uncircumsized men and it is so accepted in the culture, that I think the disparaging remarks have even made it to television dialogue.
    Yep. By virtue of being a part of their culture it's seen as acceptable, even welcome and ones own culture trumps anyone elses. Just like with cultures practicing FGM. You can' see the harm in it from that viewpoint. There was the story of Oprah Winfrey who has been a big advocate against FGM pimping a skincare product that contained ingredients taken from discarded foreskins and didn't see the irony. I saw one TV drama or other(can't recall) where one of the women characters wouldn't go out with a male character until he gets the chop. Just imagine the unholy shítstorm if you reversed the genders. The tide is turning slowly in the US though. A generation ago it would have been much harder on an uncircumcised boy among his peers and potential partners and much harder to avoid as a newborn*.









    *I saw that with a mate of mine living in the US as late as the early 90's. He was married to a local and they had a son. Well he had to be extremely proactive in not having his son chopped. Luckily his wife saw his side of it. When he wasn't around the nurses(the doctors stayed out of it) were putting pressure on her to have it done with the inference that they'd be bad parents for not doing this for their son. It got so silly that he had to wave lawyers in their faces to get them to back the hell off. And this was the early 90's.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #1420
    Sulla Felix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,442 ✭✭✭Sulla Felix


    Bafucin wrote: »
    Female circumcision on the other hand has no health benefits.
    All evidence points to it reducing the risk of HIV infection. There's two studies referenced further up the thread. Doesn't mean it's a good idea. Yet somehow mgm is advocated as a "cost effective" means of reducing HIV spread while the same position for fgm would be abhorred.


  • #1421
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Bafucin wrote: »
    There are many different types of circumcision in both males and females. Suffice to say the type of male circumcision practiced in American hospitals is NOTHING like religious male circumcision. Whatever you think of it is by doctor in a hospital.
    It's almost identical in practice save for the use of a local anesthetic. Hospital circumcisions may actually remove more tissue. Let's run over this ground again; would you be as OK with the idea of removing the clitoral prepuce in neonatal girls if it was done under medical supervision? That is exactly the same tissue targeted. Though more tissue would still be removed in the male.
    Also historically it was very beneficial in ancient times when hygiene and medical practice was poor.
    Eh that's a nonsense. It was entirely cultural and in every case was seen as a blood rite to appease some deity or other. In any event if the loss of a foreskin in males was so beneficial then why did it not evolve away in the 6 million plus years of our evolution? In that time the penis grew larger compared to other great apes yet there was no selective pressure for the loss of the human foreskin.
    Male circumcision is sometimes a medical necessity and that was more often historically. UTI's Balanitis it is also thought to reduce the transmission of STDS. Now with protection these are less problematic. But years ago in areas where circumcision developed they were rife and life threatening. Circumcision was praised for health reasons justifiably so. And it improved the general health of the male population.
    Again nonsense. I'll illustrate this nonsense further. Girls and women get far more UTI's than boys and men, yet no one is suggesting modifying their genitals as a preventative.
    Research has shown that men who are circumcised in childhood are three to four times less likely to develop penile than men who are uncircumcised.
    I presume you've not typed the word "cancer". Penile cancer is incredibly rare. The risk is very low, for either. Smoking increases the risk of it far more than if you have a foreskin or not. In those with a foreskin there is a strong link between lack of function and the risk. When you factor in men with properly functioning foreskins this risk is less again.
    Sometimes there's a medical need for circumcision, such as when the foreskin is too tight to be pulled back (retracted) over the glans.
    Indeed. Just as removal of the appendix is indicated if it becomes infected, yet we're not preemptively removing them. OH and BTW there are other surgical methods that in many, some say most cases can resolve a tight foreskin without removing it.
    In other cases, particularly in certain parts of Africa, circumcision is recommended for older boys or men to reduce the risk of certain sexually transmitted infections.
    And if you read previous posts you would have seen that these studies are highly suspect. You would have also read that FGM also reduces these risks. Indeed it halves the risk of HIV infection which is a better result than in the male circumcision, but again nobody suggests this is medically warranted and rightfully so.
    Female circumcision on the other hand has no health benefits.
    See above. Apparently it has.
    Female circumcision is done largely for male sexual preference. Miriam Martinelli and Ollé Goig write that the preference is for women's genitalia to be "flat, rigid and dry because it increases pleasure for men during intercourse. In the case of infibulation Infibulation is said by several sources to enhance male sexual pleasure; Gruenbaum reports that men seem to enjoy the effort of penetrating their wife's infibulation.
    OK then, ask yourself why? Why would men seek out flat rigid and dry for intercourse? I can guarantee no intact man would. It would be simply too painful. It's because it's more likely that circumcised men(pretty much all in the same culture) feel less so require more stimulation. Ever wonder why US porn seems obsessed with anal?

    In any event it is most certainly the women in these cultures who are the majority transmitters of this practice. It is the women who do it to other women. Men aren't involved in the procedure at all. There was a Muslim cleric in Chad IIRC who was trying to stamp out the practice, as it is not a requirement in Islam and he had to target the women far more than the men for any chance of his message getting through.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • #1422
    Lou.m
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,532 ✭✭✭Lou.m


    Wibbs wrote: »
    It's almost identical in practice save for the use of a local anesthetic. Hospital circumcisions may actually remove more tissue. Let's run over this ground again; would you be as OK with the idea of removing the clitoral prepuce in neonatal girls if it was done under medical supervision? That is exactly the same tissue targeted. Though more tissue would still be removed in the male.

    Eh that's a nonsense. It was entirely cultural and in every case was seen as a blood rite to appease some deity or other. In any event if the loss of a foreskin in males was so beneficial then why did it not evolve away in the 6 million plus years of our evolution? In that time the penis grew larger compared to other great apes yet there was no selective pressure for the loss of the human foreskin.

    Again nonsense. I'll illustrate this nonsense further. Girls and women get far more UTI's than boys and men, yet no one is suggesting modifying their genitals as a preventative.

    I presume you've not typed the word "cancer". Penile cancer is incredibly rare. The risk is very low, for either. Smoking increases the risk of it far more than if you have a foreskin or not. In those with a foreskin there is a strong link between lack of function and the risk. When you factor in men with properly functioning foreskins this risk is less again.
    Indeed. Just as removal of the appendix is indicated if it becomes infected, yet we're not preemptively removing them. OH and BTW there are other surgical methods that in many, some say most cases can resolve a tight foreskin without removing it. And if you read previous posts you would have seen that these studies are highly suspect. You would have also read that FGM also reduces these risks. Indeed it halves the risk of HIV infection which is a better result than in the male circumcision, but again nobody suggests this is medically warranted and rightfully so.

    See above. Apparently it has.

    OK then, ask yourself why? Why would men seek out flat rigid and dry for intercourse? I can guarantee no intact man would. It would be simply too painful. It's because it's more likely that circumcised men(pretty much all in the same culture) feel less so require more stimulation. Ever wonder why US porn seems obsessed with anal?

    In any event it is most certainly the women in these cultures who are the majority transmitters of this practice. It is the women who do it to other women. Men aren't involved in the procedure at all. There was a Muslim cleric in Chad IIRC who was trying to stamp out the practice, as it is not a requirement in Islam and he had to target the women far more than the men for any chance of his message getting through.

    That is a ridiculous post. If you refuse to see reality we can have no dialogue.


  • #1423
    Lou.m
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,532 ✭✭✭Lou.m


    Bafucin wrote: »
    There are many different types of circumcision in both males and females. Suffice to say the type of male circumcision practiced in American hospitals is NOTHING like religious male circumcision. Whatever you think of it is by doctor in a hospital.

    Also historically it was very beneficial in ancient times when hygiene and medical practice was poor.

    Male circumcision is sometimes a medical necessity and that was more often historically. UTI's Balanitis it is also thought to reduce the transmission of STDS. Now with protection these are less problematic. But years ago in areas where circumcision developed they were rife and life threatening. Circumcision was praised for health reasons justifiably so. And it improved the general health of the male population. But living standards have improved and in the first world it is largely no longer necessary. But not everyone lives in the first world.

    Research has shown that men who are circumcised in childhood are three to four times less likely to develop penile than men who are uncircumcised.
    Sometimes there's a medical need for circumcision, such as when the foreskin is too tight to be pulled back (retracted) over the glans. In other cases, particularly in certain parts of Africa, circumcision is recommended for older boys or men to reduce the risk of certain sexually transmitted infections. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks. However, the AAP doesn't recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns.



    Female circumcision on the other hand has no health benefits.

    Female circumcision is done largely for male sexual preference. Miriam Martinelli and Ollé Goig write that the preference is for women's genitalia to be "flat, rigid and dry because it increases pleasure for men during intercourse. In the case of infibulation Infibulation is said by several sources to enhance male sexual pleasure; Gruenbaum reports that men seem to enjoy the effort of penetrating their wife's infibulation.




    :(



    Female circumcision is performed largely for men. Not women or for the money practitioners get from it.

    Male circumcision at point in history made sense somewhat now less so except for some individuals. There was never a justifiable reason for female circumcision. Except for the sexual gratification and preference of men and it is MUCH more destructive.

    And it is largely MEN who promote female circumcision in cultures. It is also men who promote male circumcision traditionally. Particularly in religion. Religious leaders in Judaism and Islam are male.


    Here here !


  • #1424
    Zulu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭Zulu


    Lou.m wrote: »
    Here here !

    "+1 for groupthink rehash", is it?


  • #1425
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,253 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Bafucin wrote: »
    The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks. However, the AAP doesn't recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns.
    That AAP policy statement was basically all about keeping neonatal circumcisions paid for by health insurance companies.
    Because if new parents had to pay for the operation themselves, circumcision rate would drop like a stone overnight.
    Meaning the practice would stop becoming commonplace and would be more open to scrutiny.

    The gave similar justification to what you said earlier in your post.
    UTI's, which are rare in your boys and which can be treated with antibiotics in adulthood.
    Penile cancer which is very rare in the USA.
    And protection from STD's, which can be easily done through the uses of condoms and frequent STI testing.

    Also medical associations in the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany and other countries have stated that there is no justification for performing the procedure without medical urgency.


  • #1426
    Bafucin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭Bafucin


    I am not for male circumcision, you misunderstand me, what I am saying is it made sense two thousand years ago in the climates and environments it was largely practiced in. Female circumcision was for male sexual preference and for the the idea of having value for a woman's virginity and vilifying promiscuity.

    It largely does not now except for when it is medically needed. It is never medically needed for women.

    The medical profession largely up until recent times was made up of men.

    It is male Iman's who control Islam. And it was males who wrote it's ideology. It is males who practice Jewish circumcision. According to traditional Jewish law, a woman should not be used as a mohel.

    Biblically, the infant's father (avi haben) is commanded to perform the circumcision himself.

    I am not for male circumcision by the way at all. Khitan is different in different countries though. When it is done and if at all.



    Egypt's Ministry of Health and Population has banned all forms of female genital mutilation since 2007. The ministry's order declared it is 'prohibited for any doctors, nurses, or any other person to carry out any cut of, flattening or modification of any natural part of the female reproductive system'. According to a survey in the year 2000, a study found that 97% of the country's population still practiced FGM; a 2005 study found that over 95% of Egyptian women have undergone some form of FGM
    In Asia it is vastly Islam in which both male and female circumcision is done. n May 2012 it was reported by several news sources that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was working to decriminalize FGM. It is men who are in charge of the Ideology. You can't claim Islam is not a completely male dominated religion. As are most religions.The Vast majority of circumcisions in Africa of women are of Muslims. In predominantly Islamic countries with the second being various animist religions in lessor Islamic countries.
    Guinea has the second highest rate of female genital mutilation in the world it is 90% Islamic.

    In Asia, Buddhism and Hinduism were the predominant religions in Southeast Asia before the arrival of Islam; male as well as female genital mutilation is prohibited in its religious beliefs. Islam introduced FGM into Indonesia and Malaysia from the 13th century as part of its drive to convert people to Islam.

    The vast majority of male and female circumcisions in the world are Islamic and Islam is a very male dominated religion. Female circumcision is not really circumcision it is a type of castration and it much more dangerous.

    I am totally against both by the way unless it is for medical purposes.


  • #1427
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Lou.m wrote: »
    That is a ridiculous post. If you refuse to see reality we can have no dialogue.
    AKA If I refuse to see a particular reality opinion you subscribe to? Maybe try to defend your position by pointing out where I was being ridiculous? I can back up every single point I made by further explanation and links if you like.

    Again I'd pose the question; would you be OK with the idea of routinely removing the clitoral prepuce in neonatal girls if it was done under medical supervision? If not then the dialogue is just a little skewed is it not?

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #1428
    Lou.m
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,532 ✭✭✭Lou.m


    Liquid Sunshine wrote: »
    Would you care to actually counter any of his points. Usually when people have a valid rebuttal of another person's posts they are happy to highlight the flaws in their argument. The fact you dismissed his arguments so flippantly tells me your view of reality just can't handle what he has said, if I had to hazard a guess I'd say you are emotionally attached to certain beliefs and don't want to entertain them even being challenged.

    Ok.:)


  • #1429
    Pawwed Rig
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,407 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    Liquid Sunshine wrote: »
    Would you care to actually counter any of his points. Usually when people have a valid rebuttal of another person's posts they are happy to highlight the flaws in their argument. The fact you dismissed his arguments so flippantly tells me your view of reality just can't handle what he has said, if I had to hazard a guess I'd say you are emotionally attached to certain beliefs and don't want to entertain them even being challenged.
    Mod note - Liquid Sunshine, your post does not add to the debate at all. If you have a problem with a post then report it and move on. Also attack the post not the poster.


  • #1430
    Standman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭Standman


    Just as a personal anecdote on the whole circumcision thing, I once went out with a woman from the US for a while. Upon our first adventure under the sheets, things came to a temporary halt when she discovered I had a foreskin.

    Not only had she never seen one before, she was unaware that circumcision wasn't widely practiced in Ireland :eek: .

    Cue raised eyebrows and the question "But.. how do you keep it clean??", to which I replied, "You know when your hair gets dirty and you wash it in your daily shower? Yea, that's how I keep it clean".

    I got a laugh out of that and she seemed to quickly realise it wasn't as big of a deal as she apparently believed and it wasn't an issue at all.

    It just opened my eyes a bit to how much of a given it is in the States, and how misguided people seem to be about the whole issue.


  • #1431
    Bafucin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 642 ✭✭✭Bafucin


    Standman wrote: »
    Just as a personal anecdote on the whole circumcision thing, I once went out with a woman from the US for a while. Upon our first adventure under the sheets, things came to a temporary halt when she discovered I had a foreskin.

    Not only had she never seen one before, she was unaware that circumcision wasn't widely practiced in Ireland :eek: .

    Cue raised eyebrows and the question "But.. how do you keep it clean??", to which I replied, "You know when your hair gets dirty and you wash it in your daily shower? Yea, that's how I keep it clean".

    I got a laugh out of that and she seemed to quickly realise it wasn't as big of a deal as she apparently believed and it wasn't an issue at all.

    It just opened my eyes a bit to how much of a given it is in the States, and how misguided people seem to be about the whole issue.


    Can confirm in the states you are a source of curiosity with your foreskin. You can use it to your advantage :D


  • Advertisement
  • #1432
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    Standman wrote: »
    It just opened my eyes a bit to how much of a given it is in the States, and how misguided people seem to be about the whole issue.
    I remember in a Seinfeld episode, Jerry and Elaine discuss it. Elaine, I think, has never seen one (an uncircumsised penis) while Jerry says he has and says something about it being an odd thing or something.


  • #1433
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    I underlined and/or bolded a few facts of at least minor interest to me.

    Press Release Women and Men in Ireland 2013

    Irish women are more highly qualified and work fewer hours

    Irish women are more likely to have a third-level qualification than men. More than half of women aged between 25 and 35 have a third-level qualification compared with just over four out of ten men, according to the report Women and Men in Ireland 2013, published by the CSO today. Men work longer hours than women in paid employment.

    Irish women, along with women from France, have the joint highest fertility rate in the EU. Boys are more likely to leave school early. Men have a higher rate of employment but also a higher rate of unemployment. Men are more likely to be in the labour force and those looking after home/family are overwhelmingly female. Most workers in the Health and Education sectors are women while most workers in Agriculture, Construction and Transport are men. Most murder victims are male and the vast majority of the prison population is male. Ireland is the ninth highest among EU27 countries for gender equality.

    Employment: The employment rate for men in Ireland stood at about 76% in recent years but in 2009 it dropped sharply to 66.8% and continued to decrease over the next three years to reach 62.4% by 2012. However in 2013 there was an increase in the male employment rate to 64.6% followed by another rise in 2014 to 65.7%. The female employment rate reached 60.6% in 2007 before dropping to 57.6% in 2009 and it continued to decrease over the next three years to stand at 55.2% by 2012. The last 2 years have seen a small rise in the female employment rate to 55.9% in 2014.

    Men worked an average of 39.2 hours a week in paid employment in 2013 compared to 31.2 hours for women and married men worked longer hours than married women, with close to half of married men (44.1%) working for 40 hours a week or more compared to just 16.8% of married women. (Tables 2.1, 2.8 and 2.9).

    Unemployment: The unemployment rate for men in Ireland was about 5% in recent years but in 2009 it increased dramatically to 15.3%, followed by further rises over the following three years to reach 18.1% by 2012. There was a drop in the male unemployment rate in 2013 to 15.9% and another decrease in 2014 to 13.8%. The female unemployment rate, which stood at about 4% in recent years, also increased strongly to 8.3% in 2009 and continued to rise over the next four years to reach 11.4% in 2013. However the female rate of unemployment decreased in 2014 to 9.9%. The younger age groups have been most affected by unemployment, with approximately three out of ten men and two out of ten women aged 20-24 unemployed in 2013. (Tables 2.11 and 2.12).

    Education:

    The early school leavers’ rate among women aged 18-24 in 2012 was 8.2% which was lower than the rate of 11.2% for men. In 2013 more girls than boys sat higher level papers in the Leaving Certificate exams in English, French, Irish, Biology, Chemistry, Art, Home Economics and Music. More boys than girls took the higher level papers in Mathematics, Physics, Construction studies, Design and communication graphics and Engineering. The vast majority (85%) of graduates in engineering, manufacturing and construction in 2012 were male while over three-quarters of graduates in the education, health and welfare sectors were female. Women are more likely to have a third-level qualification, with over half (55.3%) of women aged 25-34 having a third-level qualification in 2013 compared to just 42.7% of men in this age group. (Tables 3.8, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4).

    Decision-making: Women are significantly under-represented in decision-making structures in Ireland at both national and regional levels. In 2013 only 15.7% of TDs in Dáil Éireann were women and they accounted for less than a fifth of members of local authorities and just over a third of the membership of Vocational Education Committees. The average female representation in national parliaments in the EU was 27.5% in 2013. (Tables 3.12 and 3.13).

    Population: Ireland, along with France, had the joint highest fertility rate in the EU at 2.01 in 2012, well above the EU average of 1.58. The average age at which women gave birth to their first child rose from 24.9 years in 1980 to 29.8 years in 2011. Ireland had 98 men per 100 women in 2013. This masks differences in age groups: at younger ages, there are more boys than girls (as more boys are born), there are fewer men in the 25-44 age group as more men have emigrated in recent years and at older ages there are more women (as women live longer). For the age group aged 85 and over, there are 48 men per 100 women. (Tables 1.1, 1.5 and 1.6).

    Migration: The years of high immigration into Ireland were 2005 to 2008. In 2007, immigration peaked at 80,000 for men and 71,100 for women. Since then, immigration has fallen very sharply for both sexes with 28,200 male immigrants and 27,700 female immigrants in 2013. Emigration rose steeply between 2004 and 2013, to 44,900 males and 44,000 females. Net migration, the number of people arriving in Ireland less the number leaving, was positive up to 2009 but since 2010 it has turned negative, resulting in a net outflow leaving Ireland of 16,700 males and 16,300 females in 2013. (Table 1.3, Graph 1.4).

    Life and death: Life expectancy at birth for women in Ireland was 83.2 years in 2012, 4.5 years above the male life expectancy of 78.7 years. Female life expectancy in Ireland was similar to the EU average while male life expectancy was 1.2 years above the EU average. Men are more likely to die at a younger age than women, with the difference in risk particularly high in the 15-24 age group. This reflects higher deaths rates for males due to suicide and motor vehicle accidents. (Tables 1.13, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.5).

    Gender Equality Index: A new index, the gender equality index, shows Ireland was ninth highest out of 27 EU member states in 2010, with a score of 55.2. This was slightly above the EU27 average score of 54, where 1 indicates total inequality and 100 indicates gender equality. (Table 1.7).

    Principal Economic Status: Men were more likely to be in the labour force than women in Ireland in 2013, with just under seven out of ten men aged 15 and over at work or unemployed compared to half of women. More than 98% of those who were looking after home/family in 2013 were women, with close to half a million women looking after home/family compared to only 8,700 men. (Table 3.1).

    Economic sectors: Over a third of women at work in Ireland in 2012 were working in the health and education sectors. Women accounted for four out of five employees in the health sector and three-quarters of those at work in education. The sectors with the highest proportions of men in 2012 were construction, agriculture and transport. In primary education 85% of teachers are female while 68% are female at second-level. However women are not well represented at senior levels: 44% of primary school managers, 41% of second-level school managers and 37% of medical and dental consultants are women. (Tables 2.7, 4.7, 4.8 and 5.14).

    Income and poverty: Women’s income in 2011 in Ireland was about three-quarters of men’s income. After adjusting for the longer hours worked by men, women’s hourly earnings were around 94% of men’s in 2011. The proportion of men at risk of poverty in 2012, after pensions and social transfers, was 15%, the same rate as for women. At risk of poverty rates were much lower for those in employment at 7% for men and 5% for women in 2011. (Tables 3.2, 3.3, 3.5 and 3.6).

    Crime: There were 13,526 persons committed to prison under sentence in 2012, of whom one in six were women. 43 men and 11 women were victims of murder or manslaughter in 2013. (Tables 1.8 and 1.10).

    Editor’s note
    Women and Men in Ireland, 2013 is available on the CSO web site.

    For further information contact Helen Cahill (01 498 4253) or Information Section (021 453 5028).

    Central Statistics Office 29 July 2014
    – ENDS –

    http://www.cso.ie/en/newsandevents/pressreleases/2014pressreleases/pressreleasewomenandmeninireland2013


  • #1434
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    Seriously? wrote: »
    The whole #womenagainstfeminism has really shown up the belligerent stance of modern day feminists.

    http://womenagainstfeminism.tumblr.com/
    July 24 article:
    Stop Fem-Splaining: What ‘Women Against Feminism’ Gets Right
    http://time.com/3028827/women-against-feminism-gets-it-right/


  • #1435
    Wompa1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,177 ✭✭✭Wompa1


    This may be the most f'd up divorce story that I've ever heard:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaC-2lj6HNg


  • #1436
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    My main problem is the double standards in the way men-only and women-only initiatives are viewed.
    Women-Only Restaurants Where Men Are Not Allowed Are Now Opening Worldwide
    http://elitedaily.com/life/culture/womenonly-restaurants-trending-world/
    (Jan 8, 2013 - but I've only just come across it now)


  • #1437
    Seriously?
    Registered Users Posts: 252 ✭✭Seriously?


    Forced circumcision in kenya claims twelve victims.
    Note who is alleged to have initiated the incident.

    Closer to home one of our guys had to have the procedure done for medical reasons when they where younger. As part of the consultation the specialist advised us to be aware that there was a risk of parents getting sued by the kids later in life. I'd imagine we aren't alone in having received that warning, something I'm surprised noone here mentioned.


  • #1438
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Seriously? wrote: »
    Forced circumcision in kenya claims twelve victims.
    Note who is alleged to have initiated the incident.
    Yep and you'll note the same "reasons" are trotted out if you reversed the genders. It's "cleaner", "better for sex" and "tradition" are the most often cited reasons for both FGM and MGM.
    Closer to home one of our guys had to have the procedure done for medical reasons when they where younger. As part of the consultation the specialist advised us to be aware that there was a risk of parents getting sued by the kids later in life. I'd imagine we aren't alone in having received that warning, something I'm surprised noone here mentioned.
    Well I would imagine that if it was for medical reasons and there was no alternative medically a lawsuit would be thrown out in seconds. Where it's done for non medical, habit/traditional reasons say in US hospitals I could see some reasoning behind a lawsuit alright.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #1439
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    I've seen quite a few articles about this issue in the US.
    Mothers for Due Process

    By Caroline Kitchens

    August 7, 2014 8:00 AM

    In January 2010, University of North Dakota student Caleb Warner was accused of sexually assaulting a fellow student. Using a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard, a UND tribunal found Warner guilty of sexual misconduct and swiftly expelled him. Yet the police, presented with the same evidence, never arrested or charged Mr. Warner. After a three-month investigation, they charged Warner’s accuser with filing a false report and issued a warrant for her arrest.

    Despite these developments, UND repeatedly refused to rescind Warner’s expulsion. Joined by the civil-liberties group FIRE, Caleb Warner’s mother, Sherry Warner-Seefeld, launched a tenacious campaign against the university. After a year and a half, UND finally reexamined her son’s case, determined that its finding of guilt was “not substantiated,” and lifted all sanctions against Mr. Warner. Though his name has been cleared and he is free to return to campus, Warner has chosen not to continue his studies at UND.

    Caleb Warner is just one casualty in the federal government’s assault on campus due process. Last month, his mother announced the launching of a new nonprofit called Families Advocating for Campus Equality (FACE). Warner-Seefeld’s co-founders, Allison Strange and Judith Grossman, also have sons who experienced the nightmare of false accusations and subsequent railroading by university courts.

    continues at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/384780/mothers-due-process-caroline-kitchens


  • #1440
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    Michelle Obama: ‘Women are smarter than men’

    First lady Michelle Obama on Wednesday proudly stated she believes women are the smarter sex and must use prominent positions in government, business and other endeavors to affect change.

    Speaking at a women’s forum at the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit in Washington alongside former first lady Laura Bush, Mrs. Obama said women in power cannot waste their opportunities because they’re simply more intelligent than men.

    “Every time I meet a child I think, who knows what’s going on in her life, whether she was just bullied or whether she had a bad day at school or whether she lost a parent — that interaction that we have with that individual, that child for that moment, could change their life,” she said. “So we can’t waste this spotlight. It is temporary and life is short, and change is needed. And women are smarter than men.”

    Mrs. Obama’s joke drew laughter and applause from the crowd. She then told the men in the audience they “can’t complain, because you’re outnumbered today.”

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/6/michelle-obama-women-are-smarter-than-men/

    Hard to know what to make of this. I think some girls and women do believe this so I don't think it's an appropriate thing to say. I think a man in an influential position would get a very difficult time if he said it.


  • Advertisement
  • #1441
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    iptba wrote: »
    I think some girls and women do believe this so I think it's an appropriate thing to say.
    I dunno about that. There are many idiots out there who believe all sorts of nonsense, some of it dangerous nonsense, hardly makes it appropriate to express. Sure they can express it, but expect a backlash. Though in this example little will come.
    I think a man in an influential position would get a very difficult time if he said it.
    If her husband said men are more intelligent than women even in jest he'd be roasted over the coals of indignation in short order. Even if he actually believed such a thing it wouldn't even occur to him to actually say such a thing knowing what would come after. Did a US college professor not get a roasting over the suggestion that some of the sciences like physics showed a strong male bias? Which is actually evident and provable.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • #1442
    Henry9
    Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭Henry9


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Did a US college professor not get a roasting over the suggestion that some of the sciences like physics showed a strong male bias? Which is actually evident and provable.
    Lawrence Summers, was president of Harvard. They tried to run him out and he resigned soon afterwards.

    What about 'if Lehman Brothers has been Lehman Sisters' blah blah blah.

    It is never acceptable to suggest men are better than women at something unless it's murder or rape or whatever.
    When was the last time you saw a news story that claimed that 'men' are better than 'women' at 'a good thing'?


  • #1443
    Henry9
    Registered Users Posts: 418 ✭✭Henry9


    iptba wrote: »
    Michelle Obama: ‘Women are smarter than men’
    If anything they're dumber, what kind of fool would lap up that kind of patronising nonsense?
    And from a woman who's famous for what? Why is she given a platform?
    Oh that's right, she's MARRIED to someone in a position of authority, big achievement there.

    It's right up there with her sad face selfie #bringbackourgirls.

    Er love, you're married to the fcuking President of the US, why not go and harangue him to do something rather than posting narcissistic nonsense because you want to join in.


  • #1444
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    Henry9 wrote: »
    If anything they're dumber, what kind of fool would lap up that kind of patronising nonsense?
    And from a woman who's famous for what? Why is she given a platform?
    Oh that's right, she's MARRIED to someone in a position of authority, big achievement there.

    It's right up there with her sad face selfie #bringbackourgirls.

    Er love, you're married to the fcuking President of the US, why not go and harangue him to do something rather than posting narcissistic nonsense because you want to join in.

    It was a joke ,lighten up


  • #1445
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    Wibbs wrote: »
    iptba wrote:
    I think some girls and women do believe this so I think it's an appropriate thing to say.
    I dunno about that. There are many idiots out there who believe all sorts of nonsense, some of it dangerous nonsense, hardly makes it appropriate to express. Sure they can express it, but expect a backlash. Though in this example little will come.
    Oops, I made a typo. It should have said I *don't* believe it's an appropriate thing to say.


  • #1446
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    Dozen Kenyan men forced to undergo circumcision cause wives complained they were bad lovers
    http://scallywagandvagabond.com/2014/08/dozen-kenyan-men-forced-to-undergo-circumcision-cause-wives-complained-they-were-bad-lovers/

    Very different culture to ours of course.


  • Advertisement
  • #1447
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,585 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Didn't know where to put this. Decent article from Owen Jones, the only Guardian columnist who's aware that men still exist:

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/15/suicide-silence-depressed-men

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • #1448
    quietsailor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,428 ✭✭✭quietsailor


    http://m.independent.ie/opinion/man-loses-contest-to-father-his-own-child-30495474.html

    A friend had this up on his Facebook page yesterday. After reading the story It's scary that;
    a. The biological father has basically no rights in the situation.
    b. Having a big expensive legal team gets you better credit with the judge even when you read the law yourself.


  • #1449
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    quietsailor wrote: »
    http://m.independent.ie/opinion/man-loses-contest-to-father-his-own-child-30495474.html

    A friend had this up on his Facebook page yesterday. After reading the story It's scary that;
    a. The biological father has basically no rights in the situation.
    b. Having a big expensive legal team gets you better credit with the judge even when you read the law yourself.
    I believe this issue is discussed in more detail here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057260896


  • #1450
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,889 ✭✭✭iptba


    iptba wrote: »
    I've seen quite a few articles about this issue in the US.
    Mothers for Due Process

    By Caroline Kitchens

    August 7, 2014 8:00 AM

    In January 2010, University of North Dakota student Caleb Warner was accused of sexually assaulting a fellow student. Using a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard, a UND tribunal found Warner guilty of sexual misconduct and swiftly expelled him. Yet the police, presented with the same evidence, never arrested or charged Mr. Warner. After a three-month investigation, they charged Warner’s accuser with filing a false report and issued a warrant for her arrest.

    Despite these developments, UND repeatedly refused to rescind Warner’s expulsion. Joined by the civil-liberties group FIRE, Caleb Warner’s mother, Sherry Warner-Seefeld, launched a tenacious campaign against the university. After a year and a half, UND finally reexamined her son’s case, determined that its finding of guilt was “not substantiated,” and lifted all sanctions against Mr. Warner. Though his name has been cleared and he is free to return to campus, Warner has chosen not to continue his studies at UND.

    Caleb Warner is just one casualty in the federal government’s assault on campus due process. Last month, his mother announced the launching of a new nonprofit called Families Advocating for Campus Equality (FACE). Warner-Seefeld’s co-founders, Allison Strange and Judith Grossman, also have sons who experienced the nightmare of false accusations and subsequent railroading by university courts.


    continues at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/384780/mothers-due-process-caroline-kitchens
    ‘Rape culture’ leads to manhunts on campus

    By Andrea Peyser
    http://nypost.com/2014/08/11/rape-culture-leads-to-manhunts-on-campus/


  • #1451
    banquo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    iptba wrote: »
    http://nypost.com/2014/08/11/rape-culture-leads-to-manhunts-on-campus/

    When you see it:

    q6aKT04.png


  • Advertisement
Advertisement