Fuck Sexism

[ZeaLitY]

Fuck it. You people are fucking stupid. This is the classic resolution of things like this on the forums, where the humanists and idealists retreat as a flood of centrists come in to try and make everything better as the religious archvillains wait in the wings. Ever since this forum was founded, the balance of posters has shifted from rational secularists like Lord J and GrayLensman to moderates and idiots.

What's the real harm in cutting off part of a baby's penis because their family believes in fairytale nonsense? Yeah, what's the harm? The sheer brutality of that statement should be self-evident, and yet something like this gets respect because religion demands it.

Jesus fucking Christ. To any atheists or agnostics who agreed with what I've said but have chosen to stay silent, come out. Part of the reason change has been so slow is because humanists and atheists are afraid to out themselves for fear of losing religious family and friends or social prestige. Well, enough of that. We are the largest underrepresented and most hated minority in America. But there are more of us than you think. Come out.

[Shee]

If I went into shock I sure as hell don't remember.  And since I've been circumcised I'll never know what foreskin is like....I can live with that...I don't think I've thought ONCE about if I had foreskin.  Okay maybe in puberty...

I'm not arguing that it's connection to religion is silly, at least now.  Is that religious insanity STILL going on?  In America?  Most indications point that circumcisions are down here, right?  But I just don't understand the rest of your vehement opposition, Z.  So what if the hygienical differences aren't astounding?  So what if the foreskin gives more pleasure?  Is pleasure all that drives you?  If a man was cut and wants his son to be cut as a baby, so what?  If that man was religious but did it simply out of the fact that he himself was cut, does it matter?  Would the Mother reasonably object to either?

Do you honestly, in your heart of hearts, beleive that some boys will grow up and lament, "IF ONLY I HAD SOME FORESKIN!!!!" 

IF YOU DO, then I must admit I gotta be missing something here.
IF YOU DO NOT, then I guess your anger arises from issues outside of the U.S., while valid, are vastly different. 

Or maybe I'm just being an idiot...but I'd at least like to think not so.

And male sexism....I see some of the same shit here that women go through everywhere, as far as having to look a certain way and act a certain way.  I like big jeans and hoodies and t-shirts, so I'm immediately some dirtbag since my jeans aren't stuck to me and my hair isn't 8 feet tall or whatever.  Just a part of the town and the nature of the Entertainment Beast that looms over it.
Also, the sterotype that all men are cheating bastards who will fuck anything with long hair and two legs.  Gets on my nerves!!!!
As far as child custody goes, and I hate to say this, I think every case is different. 

[x_XTacTX_x]

Fuck it. You people are fucking stupid. This is the classic resolution of things like this on the forums, where the humanists and idealists retreat as a flood of centrists come in to try and make everything better as the religious archvillains wait in the wings. Ever since this forum was founded, the balance of posters has shifted from rational secularists like Lord J and GrayLensman to moderates and idiots.

What's the real harm in cutting off part of a baby's penis because their family believes in fairytale nonsense? Yeah, what's the harm? The sheer brutality of that statement should be self-evident, and yet something like this gets respect because religion demands it.

Jesus fucking Christ. To any atheists or agnostics who agreed with what I've said but have chosen to stay silent, come out. Part of the reason change has been so slow is because humanists and atheists are afraid to out themselves for fear of losing religious family and friends or social prestige. Well, enough of that. We are the largest underrepresented and most hated minority in America. But there are more of us than you think. Come out.

Hey man, cool it. If you're going to resort to nothing but ad hominems then I don't see the point in talking to you, and I'm honestly kind of offended by what you're saying. From what I've seen, all you're doing is trying to make more chaos and conflict out of the situation between theists and atheists. You fail to help try and find a common ground between the two, and all you're succeeding in doing is causing the rest of us more bashing, regardless of what you think.

People are always going to believe different things when it comes to the cosmos, the afterlife, what have you, and really if it helps them have a happier life, save for biggotry and harm towards others (not unlike what you're showing here) there's nothing wrong with that. And really, you're kind of romanticizing the value of a foreskin, which in reality places right above only the appendix at best, serving for nothing of value in the modern world other than sexual pleasure, which really wouldn't change much for either party, because they're not experiencing the other side.

I can't believe I'm about to say this, because you've always been someone I've found myself to admire, but grow up, dude. You can better yourself by whatever means but what you're writing is nothing but prejudice. If you think atheists are being oppressed, you need to change your perspective for a little while, my friend.

[FaustWolf]

I'm reminded of the story of an Aztec priest who stood naked before the sun and slit open his manhood down the center and let the blood run freely to satisfy one of the Aztec gods (true story according to a college history book, I forget the name and edition now, because that one is cite-worthy). Uh, just wanted to toss that out there, make of it what you will.

Belief certainly has the ability to persuade people to inflict pain on themselves and others; this is not in the realm of fervent argument, like "Belief in a God inevitably stunts your intellectual development"; this is in the realm of you're cut and bleeding, dude(ette).

In light of the shock a male baby might experience during the procedure (anyone know what kind of anesthesia is typically used? What about circumcisions carried out in the third world?), and given the advances in hygiene since the inception of circumsicion, it would appear from cost-benefit analysis that the practice should be stopped. If men wish to be circumsized, it could become a matter of voluntary cosmetic surgery. I commend ZeaLitY for bringing attention to it, though I still feel that clitorectomy should be higher on our list of practices to eliminate. Not because one gender should be favored, but because clitorectomy inflicts a far more severe level of debilitation.

And while we're in the sexism topic, I think we need to flip things around a little. So far it's only been sexism against women. But what about men? They lose most divorce or child custody cases and always end up as the ones paying child support, when they should have just as much right to their children as the wife. I'm not too versed in male sexism, but I know it's out there, I've heard people complain about it, and I know it's worth discussing. Let's see some equality here, people!

We've touched on this briefly, but discussion could certainly be expanded. From a male point of view, I've felt pressure to keep my emotions cooped up till the point I go insane and start hurting things. This is fundamentally unhealthy. I'm much enthused by the anecdotes offered by Kebrel and V_Translanka with regard to this, and I think it shows we're making real progress as a civilization.

What other examples of socially or psychologically harmful anti-man attitudes can we find?


EDIT: With the specific example of circumsicion, I'm curious: does the pro-choice stance open the possibility that women should be able to choose to have their sons circumcised whilst in the womb? And clitorectomies performed on their daughters whilst in the womb? It would seem that if a pregnant woman has the right to choose to have the entire fetus destroyed at any point during its development, even barring a medical need, that she should also have the right to ask for an in-womb circumcision. Unless I'm missing something, the anti-circumcision position implies that children become full human beings with rights separate from the mother after separation from the mother, and that the fetus' lack of human rights flows from the fact that the fetus is physically integrated with the mother.

[Truthordeal]

Considering that only about 4% of the US population labels themselves as "atheist," against 83% that considers themselves Christian, 4% that consider themselves some other religion, and 8% who merely consider themselves non-religious, they are severely overrepresented. These numbers don't equal 100% because I truncated and rounded up as necessary.

Latinos and non-white Hispanics have become the minority majority and have zero senators and 1 representative. I can't say for sure about atheists in Congress, but there are a few that I suspect are "closet atheists," as well as a few who are openly atheist. Ernie Chambers, the senator who sued God, is an agnostic.

In any event, I was a moderate before, and I'm even more of one now. If there was one thing I learned from this is that women are indeed discriminated against. I won't say the word oppressed, because that's far too strong of a word to use, but Zeality, Lord J, etc. opened my eyes to certain things I had not thought of.

And you're getting upset over circumcision, a very common and well accepted medical procedure, even supported by the AMA.

In the end, you can't have what you want. The Christian majority in this country is far too large, you'll never get rid of all things with any sort of connection to religion.

You are way too much of a fire breather. Rational secularists at least acknowledge our right to exist and believe how we want. They understand that religion isn't evil, but the people who misuse it are.

At the same time, I realize that secularism isn't evil, just another world view. The general believers aren't evil, but the ones that abuse the beliefs to their anti-religious ends can be just as evil and misguided as the man who killed George Tiller.

I've said this before about government, but the same goes for society: You cannot have it all one way or the other. You need a mix and for that to happen, we need to respect each others differences, even if we don't particularly like them. Tolerance and cooperation is the true path to human progress, not a complete cut from our foundations, nor a complete cut from new ideas and progressive attitudes.

Extremists at all sides prevent us from solving problems and coming to solutions that will aid people who desperately need it. Both types of zealots are dumb and a butt. Stop being so dogdamned stubborn.

[Shee]

What, exactly, is debilitating about male circumcision.  I stand by the argument that if it is not remembered in the slightest there is no harm.  Is it any different from the tree that falls in the woods but no one hears it?  Is there a sound?

As far as male sexism goes, all the previous stuff stands as well for me.  I can "get real" with my male friends but I can admit I usualy open with some sort of "Dude, not trying to sound weak, but...." or something like that.

[FaustWolf]

I also wouldn't know what may or may not be debilitating about it; we'd have to ask a man who was old enough to remember being circumcized and experienced sexual pleasure both before and after. I think the major issue with male circumcision is the pain the child experiences during the procedure. Normally I wouldn't worry too much about this in developed-world clinics (c'mon, they use anesthesia, right...? Right...?), but the fact that it may be conducted without anesthesia in developing countries gives me significant pause. I've heard that female circumcisions are conducted without anesthesia in developing countries at least.

If we're worried about pain inflicted on a child in the hours after his or her birth, I wonder whether we should also be worried about the pain a fetus may undergo during late-term abortions that occur from time to time. Once again I'd like to see the need for abortion completely vanquished if at all possible precisely because I worry about this sort of thing on humanist grounds, but I wonder how other pro-choicers feel about the issue of fetal pain during abortions that occur ~22 weeks into gestation (I think that's the scientific community's loose consensus on when the proper pain receptors are in place, I could be wrong), and how it morally differs from pain inflicted on the child in the case of post-birth circumcision.

[Shee]

I also wouldn't know what may or may not be debilitating about it; we'd have to ask a man who was old enough to remember being circumcized and experienced sexual pleasure both before and after.

Ummm..I guess never say never but does this guy even exist?

As for the rest...okay.  I wanted some answers and got'em.

[Thought]

Also, Thought. Comparing circumcision to polydactylism doesn't make any sense to me. It is a birth defect that needs surgery so that the person can have semi-functional hands, having a penis isn't a birth defect 0_o.

The point was largely academic. As noted, in most cases, the individual is fully functional (polydactylism includes toes too) if left untreated. Z isn't objecting to circumcision based on the fact that it mutilates or is traumatic, nor is he approving of it because it eases social interactions (as circumcision has a similar, though more limited, effect). The primary criteria that Z is judging circumcision is religion. As it is religious, it's guilty. This isn't to say that the trauma and mutilation isn't a concern of Z's, but even if those elements were removed, his primary objection would still remain. Indeed, even if science did discover some practical benefits to it, I suspect Z would still demand that the religious rites surrounding it be eliminated. So there is really no way, based on Z’s criteria, for circumcision to be given a favorable verdict.

As I said, this was largely academic. I don't think it reveals anything that would surprise anyone. And while I may be overly hasty in this estimation, I don't think Z would object too strongly to my assessment.

[FaustWolf]

Very good question Shee. I dunno. There's gotta be societies out there where men are circumcized relatively late in life, and also men who've had circumcision as voluntary cosmetic surgery. People have had themselves changed to resemble tigers (I saw it on the discovery channel once I think...maybe a documentary on furries?), so this shouldn't be too outlandish.

[ZaichikArky]

Fuck it. You people are fucking stupid. This is the classic resolution of things like this on the forums, where the humanists and idealists retreat as a flood of centrists come in to try and make everything better as the religious archvillains wait in the wings. Ever since this forum was founded, the balance of posters has shifted from rational secularists like Lord J and GrayLensman to moderates and idiots.

And so you think that attacking people based on their beliefs is the way to do it? While you live in America, you are completely surrounded by the religious majority. And it STILL is the super majority. It may not be that way on the forums, but we're not arguing about how the forums represent real life this time around. The only way to make people change is to negotiate and to cooperate- something that the religious majority at least in the States does try to do. They are becoming more and more progressive as they speak. You want to convert the religious into Atheists? Or was it completely dismantle religion as a whole? Well good luck with the latter... as for the former, it can be done with a lot of education and immersion. Still, losing one's religion isn't always so easy. Didn't you go through that? I'm not sure how it was like for you, but completely denouncing your very foundation of your beliefs can't be easy. You typically don't just wake up one day and say "Hey, I don't believe in God anymore!" You went through a process, and the process starts with understanding how the world works and educating yourself.

Sorry that I'm a moderate and not some kind of Anti-Christ, but very few people go to lengths that you go to defend your beliefs. Partially it's because I don't find the religious majority so harmful because like I said, there would be still be evil and corruption in this world regardless if religion existed or not. Since it does exist, might as well use it to make the world a better place. And if it can't, then just lose your religion and practice what you do believe in- EDUCATING(not indoctrinating) others about your beliefs.

What's the real harm in cutting off part of a baby's penis because their family believes in fairytale nonsense? Yeah, what's the harm? The sheer brutality of that statement should be self-evident, and yet something like this gets respect because religion demands it.

Excuse me, but I think it is COMPLETE and utter bullshit that the baby is "traumatized" from the shock of getting a tiny piece of skin removed. Give me a fucking break. The baby is a new born and it doesn't remember and it will face many, many more painful things further on in its life that it also won't remember! As for the long-term terrible things about removing a sensual part of the male organ, I have not read any study where it has been conclusive that uncircumcised men perform better, or feel anything differently than circumcised men. It may be a useless procedure but that's all it is to me- a useless procedure that has no health benefits and no adverse effects either except for cosmetic differences. Some people prefer the look of a circumcised penis, I do, but does that mean I think babies should have it done? I used to think so, now I'm hesitant to make a strong stance on it.

Jesus fucking Christ. To any atheists or agnostics who agreed with what I've said but have chosen to stay silent, come out. Part of the reason change has been so slow is because humanists and atheists are afraid to out themselves for fear of losing religious family and friends or social prestige. Well, enough of that. We are the largest underrepresented and most hated minority in America. But there are more of us than you think. Come out.

I am more of an atheist than an agnostic, but I will respect everyone's points of views... to a certain extent. I think that your attitude is more harmful to the reputation of atheists and agnostics than staying silent.

EDIT:

Ummm..I guess never say never but does this guy even exist?

Yes, of course they exist. A guy I knew at a forum that I used to go to had circumcision when he was 18. I am not sure of the reason but I'd really like to ask him if it feels any differently. Also, in some Asian countries where water quality is poor, there is this strange plastic device that a guy can wear and it will remove the foreskin... they believe that circumcision will help cut down on infections. I'm not sure if it's true or not, but there are plenty of people who get circumsision later on in life, it's just hard to find them  in 1st world countries because of good water conditions and the like... Some men also do it for cosmetic reasons(though that is also rare)

[Truthordeal]

I've seen male sexism before. Despite the fact that my father has supported both me, my brother(who suffers from an immune deficiency and needs monthly infusions), and his new ex-wife's kids, he doesn't get any assistance from the government, who is constantly requesting more aid for single mothers when trying to reform welfare.

If his divorce gets nasty, the stepmom will get the upperhand. In SC, the wife in divorce cases, especially if she gets the kids(me and my brother have or are about to move out) gets child support, and probably some form of alimony. Even nonmarried women can separate from their partner and demand "palimony."

To sort of tread back on the abortion topic, according to the law, the husband/boyfriend isn't allowed any input on the abortion process. If he opposes the abortion, well, tough crap for him. It's his kid too, with 50% of his genetic material, shouldn't he have a say in the matter?

I suppose it is the woman who carries it for nine months though, and should ultimately make the decision. But still, ideally we should aim to have both partners opt for the abortion.

There are double standards all over the place for men, but I guess I shouldn't consider it sexism, since the government's not trying to systematically take men's rights away. Of course, that's the same for women too.

On a lighter note, for every network like G4 or SpikeTV, that cater to men with such base things as video games, wrestling cars and scantily clad women, there's another Lifetime, Oxygen, WE, Lifetime Movie Channel, etc. where if any attractive man shows up in any movie, he's either abusive or a douche. I honestly don't see how it empowers women as much as it reinforces the negative patriarchal stereotype of men in general. Very rarely do the women survive their ordeals.

I'm certainly don't feel oppressed by this. I figure that women sometimes hate men and want an outlet for it, and men like cars and boobs and want something to satisfy that desire. Its human nature, not inherently sexist, and its certainly not hurting anyone of the opposite sex by it existing.

[Romana]

Jesus fucking Christ. To any atheists or agnostics who agreed with what I've said but have chosen to stay silent, come out.

Here.

Latinos and non-white Hispanics have become the minority majority and have zero senators and 1 representative. I can't say for sure about atheists in Congress, but there are a few that I suspect are "closet atheists," as well as a few who are openly atheist.

"Closet atheists" kind of worries me. Are there people out there that afraid to admit that they're atheist? I guess I can see why if the church is as aggressive and hateful as it seems.

And you're getting upset over circumcision, a very common and well accepted medical procedure, even supported by the AMA.

Accepted medical procedure or not, I think it's justified to be upset over it, considering that is in fact a violation of one's right to their own body. Baby or not, a human has their rights. Let's think of it this way -- being upset over the fact and basis for it rather than it actually being done to oneself. It has root in nothing other than religion; consider that along with this, a child, having its beliefs and religious standing decided by others, has no choice in a decision derived simply from a text that they may not even believe in upon growing up. It feels like an invasion of pride.

In the end, you can't have what you want. The Christian majority in this country is far too large, you'll never get rid of all things with any sort of connection to religion.

Just because something looks hopeless doesn't mean you can't try. I'd die with a smile knowing I tried rather than regret what I didn't fight for. If there's only one life, I'd rather not back down in any situation.

I've said this before about government, but the same goes for society: You cannot have it all one way or the other. You need a mix and for that to happen, we need to respect each others differences, even if we don't particularly like them. Tolerance and cooperation is the true path to human progress, not a complete cut from our foundations, nor a complete cut from new ideas and progressive attitudes.

I really can't see a "mix" happening with the religious condemning all those with even slightly-differing views to hell so they can burn for eternity.

"God forgives everyone" but he'll send people to hell still. "Everyone is equal in God's eyes" yet he seems to promote discrimination left and right in the Bible. "God loves everyone" yet he doesn't take a second of his time to stop thousands dying in disasters, or give food to the starving. And if said events are really "all just part of God's plan" or whatever, that's really fucking sickening. I could never follow someone like that.

[Truthordeal]

The condemnation of the atheists by the religious is no worse than the condemnation of the religious by the atheists.

The fact that your group is a minority does not grant you the special privilege of immunity from being criticized. In fact, the fact that your beliefs are so far on the fringe entails more criticism. You are, after all, attempting to over throw thousands of years of tradition and social order.

[ZeaLitY]

Do you honestly, in your heart of hearts, beleive that some boys will grow up and lament, "IF ONLY I HAD SOME FORESKIN!!!!"  

There are several groups committed to stopping circumcision, and there's a popular surgery for restoring foreskin. I'm not the first one to care about it. What dawned upon me a minute ago is how hypocritical this is for religious people who are against abortion. It's bad to kill a "baby" who hasn't achieved life yet and won't feel anything, but it's A-OK to torture a living one?

You fail to help try and find a common ground between the two, and all you're succeeding in doing is causing the rest of us more bashing, regardless of what you think.

There is no common ground between the two. Many religious people believe the earth is doomed, women are inferior, etc. and this is strictly incompatible with humanism and reason. It's the same for religions coexisting with one another.

People are always going to believe different things when it comes to the cosmos, the afterlife, what have you, and really if it helps them have a happier life, save for bigotry and harm towards others (not unlike what you're showing here) there's nothing wrong with that.

Look up opportunity cost. How much better would this world be instead of idly waiting for the next, people realized that this is all we have, and poured their passion into making this a better place? And I'm sorry, but you might as well be advocating something like the Matrix, where humans are connected to some pleasant virtual reality instead of facing the truth. I want the truth, every time. That's real living and real intelligence; that's science.

I can't believe I'm about to say this, because you've always been someone I've found myself to admire, but grow up, dude. You can better yourself by whatever means but what you're writing is nothing but prejudice. If you think atheists are being oppressed, you need to change your perspective for a little while, my friend.

I'm not the one saying "it's okay to cut off part of a baby's flesh to appease an invisible sky-God." That speaks volumes about who needs to grow up.

Indeed, even if science did discover some practical benefits to it, I suspect Z would still demand that the religious rites surrounding it be eliminated. So there is really no way, based on Z’s criteria, for circumcision to be given a favorable verdict.

You'll notice that I qualified my criticisms with "IIRC the reduction of AIDs incidence in Africa from circumcision has been proven false" beforehand.

Excuse me, but I think it is COMPLETE and utter bullshit that the baby is "traumatized" from the shock of getting a tiny piece of skin removed.

Make an incision on your clitoris, right now. As a male, I can't even imagine the pain of someone cutting my penis, but perhaps you can empathize. And female circumcision is also a religious practice in some parts of the world. It is not "skin", but part of a sex organ with very dense nerve fiber.

I think that your attitude is more harmful to the reputation of atheists and agnostics than staying silent.

To this, and your other criticisms: http://www.chronocompendium.com/Forums/index.php/topic,7106.0.html

I used to think the same. I worried on a personal level, too, that criticizing religion openly would make me seem shrill and hateful. Well, that kind of cowardice is useless.

In the end, you can't have what you want. The Christian majority in this country is far too large, you'll never get rid of all things with any sort of connection to religion.

You're on the wrong side of history. The same words have been said about other majorities and religious powers that have since disappeared into history. George W. Bush was the last serious hurrah the religious right had in politics. You admitted yourself that secularism is on the rise.