Author Topic: Fuck Sexism  (Read 99097 times)

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #165 on: July 10, 2009, 09:01:46 pm »
That birth is more traumatic in no way justifies the trauma of circumcision. The value of the procedure (and it is in some cases medically beneficial) is independent of the subjective experiences of the mother of the boy in giving birth to him.

The one does not directly justify the other, you are correct. But, inasmuch as people use the "trauma" of circumcision as an argument against it by relying upon the implication that a newborn baby cannot handle that level of trauma, the reasoning is invalidated by the proximity of the truly traumatic experience of being born. Thus, the one indirectly justifies the other on these narrow terms.

Radical_Dreamer

  • Entity
  • Zurvan Surfer (+2500)
  • *
  • Posts: 2778
    • View Profile
    • The Chrono Compendium
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #166 on: July 11, 2009, 02:53:43 pm »
That birth is more traumatic in no way justifies the trauma of circumcision. The value of the procedure (and it is in some cases medically beneficial) is independent of the subjective experiences of the mother of the boy in giving birth to him.

The one does not directly justify the other, you are correct. But, inasmuch as people use the "trauma" of circumcision as an argument against it by relying upon the implication that a newborn baby cannot handle that level of trauma, the reasoning is invalidated by the proximity of the truly traumatic experience of being born. Thus, the one indirectly justifies the other on these narrow terms.

I'm still not buying it. One person volunteered for a traumatic experience; this does not justify said person causing another person a non freely chosen traumatic experience.

I find the "x has it worse" type of arguments troubling in principle. Should we not strive to make all things as best as possible, regardless of the existence of other, potentially greater problems?

Truthordeal

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Dunno what's supposed to go here. Oh now I see.
    • View Profile
    • Youtube Account
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #167 on: July 11, 2009, 05:10:25 pm »
I wish someone would give me one decent drawback to having a circumcision.

And no, the "mutilation" and "religious" arguments don't work on me.

Exodus

  • Acacia Deva (+500)
  • *
  • Posts: 506
  • How do we know we exist?
    • View Profile
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #168 on: July 11, 2009, 05:35:40 pm »
I wish someone would give me one decent drawback to having a circumcision.

And no, the "mutilation" and "religious" arguments don't work on me.

It has no medical benefits, desensitizes and deforms/disables the penis and was used widely in America during the so-called "masturbation hysteria" as a tool to control male sexuality, which obviously didn't work.

It's an antiquated, barbarous act of mutilation for which I still hold a grudge against my parents for allowing to happen.


Truthordeal

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Dunno what's supposed to go here. Oh now I see.
    • View Profile
    • Youtube Account
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #169 on: July 11, 2009, 07:49:14 pm »
Didn't hear a drawback other than the "durrr, it's mutilation, durrrr" complaint, which is more subjective than an objective drawback.

alfadorredux

  • Entity
  • Mystical Knight (+700)
  • *
  • Posts: 746
  • Just a purple cat
    • View Profile
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #170 on: July 11, 2009, 08:12:06 pm »
If the doctor slips up, he could end up castrating the kid he's supposed to be circumcising (it's unusual, but it has happened). Is that good enough for you?

ZaichikArky

  • Mystical Knight (+700)
  • *
  • Posts: 718
    • View Profile
    • Livejournal
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #171 on: July 11, 2009, 08:28:37 pm »
I wish someone would give me one decent drawback to having a circumcision.

And no, the "mutilation" and "religious" arguments don't work on me.

It has no medical benefits, desensitizes and deforms/disables the penis and was used widely in America during the so-called "masturbation hysteria" as a tool to control male sexuality, which obviously didn't work.

It's an antiquated, barbarous act of mutilation for which I still hold a grudge against my parents for allowing to happen.



Hm... didn't Lord J just post an article describing benefits? I think that there aren't really any benefits either, but this is to say the same as it isn't mutilation. It isn't traumatic and it isn't mutilation, it's just one of those perhaps unneessary procedures that don't really do anything at all except make the penis look bigger. Hey, that's a benefit! Do you seriously expect me to believe that you are desensitized because your parents "castrated" you? Do you actually experience ANY lack of sensation, or are you just saying that because you're against the procedure?

Also, I have had something happen to me that is very similar to circumcision and almost all women have it happen to them later on in life when they do remember it. It's called... BREAKING THE HYMEN. It is almost always done very voluntarily, because the woman wants it to be "cut" and it hurts a fucking lot. Sure, I bled and it hurt , but I don't regret the "procedure" happening. I think that it has a potential of being just as "traumatic" as circumcision, but most women don't view it that way- they view it almost as a necessity.  So to me, it is very comparable.

So then if women remember that experience and circumcision is NEVER remembered by the infant, why the hell aren't we calling breaking the hymen mutilation? My hymen was really pretty and round before I lost my virginity. Now it is ugly and torn up. It LOOKS mutilated. Does a penis look mutilated after it's circumcised? I would argue that in America, a cut penis is much more attractive-looking than an un-cut penis. 

So what does that say? Circumcision is very subjective. I'm not for it, and I'm not against it, really. No, I absolutely do not agree with anyone who says that it's "traumatic mutilation" because a far more traumatic mutilation is the breaking of the hymen for a woman, and no one ever even considers that when all they are thinking about is making a tiny incision on an infant when it will remember nothing that happened the next day, and certainly not later down in life. It has NOT been proven that men who are cut lack sensation on their penises. People may point out the fact that all this sensitive nerve tissue is down there, but does that make it any different to compare an uncircumcised man's "pleasure" to an uncircumcised man's pleasure? I really do not think so, and it is incredibly difficult to prove otherwise.

Edit:

Quote
If the doctor slips up, he could end up castrating the kid he's supposed to be circumcising (it's unusual, but it has happened). Is that good enough for you?

Absolutely NOT. That is complete bullshit logic(if I were even to call it that). Doctors can fuck up in ANY minor operation. It applies to EVERYTHING in the field of medicine. That's just like saying someone goes in to have their tonsils removed and instead comes out with their voice box removed. Does that happen? Maybe, but really freaken rarely... These days, since they got rid of the "burning" method of circumcision a while back, it's really really rare to even think about fudging up that procedure and then going back to what I said, it is absolutely no different from doctors scewing up on ANY other medical procedure.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2009, 08:36:13 pm by ZaichikArky »

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10795
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #172 on: July 11, 2009, 11:49:29 pm »
"Incredibly different" is relative. Simple logic dictates that more pleasurable tissue = more pleasure compared to less, and several studies have advocated this position, regardless of anecdotal reports from circumsized men. If it's truly impossible to tell the difference, why can't this simple logic of nerve tissue versus no nerve tissue be accepted? I wonder why some of you are struggling so hard to be passionately indifferent about this.

Truthordeal

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Dunno what's supposed to go here. Oh now I see.
    • View Profile
    • Youtube Account
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #173 on: July 12, 2009, 02:18:11 am »
Because with the economy tanking, cap and trade being passed, universal healthcare being considered, education staying abysmal, the Iraq War coming to a close, another front in Afghanistan beginning, revolution brewing in Iran and Honduras, Al Franken making a mockery of the electoral process, Mark Sanford cheating and not shutting up about it after two weeks!!, North Korea going nuclear, Iran going nuclear, the G-8 summit meeting, stem cell research being researched, pot possibly being legalized, taxes rising, global warming rising or falling, depending on whom you ask, the press servicing Obama at every stop and gay marriage being passed or pushed through in several states, there are more important issues right now than whether or not we should stop chopping off some random baby's wee-wee.

So, I'll let my Libertarian values do my talking:

I don't care. And the government should stay out of it. Let the parents and a licensed doctor(both groups are much more capable of making this decision than anyone here) make that decision for themselves.

Either the government stays out of the medical field completely(meaning not regulating any practice, be it abortion or stem cell research or circumcision) or the government heads the medical field(letting it regulate abortion, stem cell research and circumcision to its heart's content).

You cannot realistically have it both ways. You can't say that this needs to be regulated and this does not.

Here's my take on the entire idea of government intervention in the medical field: stay out. No funding abortion, stem cell research or any other medical treatment with taxpayer money. Let Bono and the free market handle that. And let doctors decide what is a proper treatment when because they, unlike bloggers or politicians, know what the right way to treat someone is.

I cannot support the notion of forcing a pro-life doctor to perform an abortion, or an anti-circumcision doctor to perform a circumcision, which is exactly how it will be if the government keeps meddling in the medical field.

I realize at this point I've rambled far from the topic, but let me be blunt. Let the doctors and parents decide their individual cases, just as they do for abortion.

ZaichikArky

  • Mystical Knight (+700)
  • *
  • Posts: 718
    • View Profile
    • Livejournal
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #174 on: July 12, 2009, 03:00:55 am »
Because with the economy tanking, cap and trade being passed, universal healthcare being considered, education staying abysmal, the Iraq War coming to a close, another front in Afghanistan beginning, revolution brewing in Iran and Honduras, Al Franken making a mockery of the electoral process, Mark Sanford cheating and not shutting up about it after two weeks!!, North Korea going nuclear, Iran going nuclear, the G-8 summit meeting, stem cell research being researched, pot possibly being legalized, taxes rising, global warming rising or falling, depending on whom you ask, the press servicing Obama at every stop and gay marriage being passed or pushed through in several states, there are more important issues right now than whether or not we should stop chopping off some random baby's wee-wee.

So, I'll let my Libertarian values do my talking:

I don't care. And the government should stay out of it. Let the parents and a licensed doctor(both groups are much more capable of making this decision than anyone here) make that decision for themselves.

Either the government stays out of the medical field completely(meaning not regulating any practice, be it abortion or stem cell research or circumcision) or the government heads the medical field(letting it regulate abortion, stem cell research and circumcision to its heart's content).

You cannot realistically have it both ways. You can't say that this needs to be regulated and this does not.

Here's my take on the entire idea of government intervention in the medical field: stay out. No funding abortion, stem cell research or any other medical treatment with taxpayer money. Let Bono and the free market handle that. And let doctors decide what is a proper treatment when because they, unlike bloggers or politicians, know what the right way to treat someone is.

I cannot support the notion of forcing a pro-life doctor to perform an abortion, or an anti-circumcision doctor to perform a circumcision, which is exactly how it will be if the government keeps meddling in the medical field.

I realize at this point I've rambled far from the topic, but let me be blunt. Let the doctors and parents decide their individual cases, just as they do for abortion.

Hm, you do drive very valid points, but I am still somewhat of a socialist and I prefer the government to become MORE involved with health care. Health care in America is abysmal. Despite having the most educated and professional doctors in the world, thousands of Americans are not getting the right treatment they need because of insurance hoops that they have to jump through, and if they DO get the treatment, many go in debt because they either don't have insurance or their insurance will not cover the procedures. That coupled with the astronomical price of prescription drugs makes this country a pretty shitty place if you get sick.

I really wanted Hillary Clinton to win presidency because she would have given health care the reform it needs. Obama is not serious about straightening the health care crisis in this country and with most of the media talking about the economy, no one really cares about health care when IMO it's probably one of the biggest problems we have as a country.

As for the part about the government staying away from circumcision and abortion, I don't think that was really ever in question. The only thing the government does is legalize both procedures. No one is really arguing that abortion and circumcision be illegal, and abortion isn't really funded as it is.

If taxpayers' money wasn't helping fun the medical field altogether (which is what you seem to be suggesting), our health care would basically become third world because right now, it's bad enough as it is.

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10795
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #175 on: July 12, 2009, 03:38:37 am »
Quote
there are more important issues right now than whether or not we should stop chopping off some random baby's wee-wee.

This is a fallacy, and it's also inaccurate. One's right to one's own body is a fundamental right that "give me my rights and stay the hell away" libertarians should be particularly interested in.

Quote
Let Bono and the free market handle that.

As a sidenote, I'll let you in on something about business and the free market: it can be abused just as badly, if not worse than governmental power. Libertarians, by hating government and endorsing business, are simply endorsing one kind of institutional feebleness over another. The free market is not some kind of savior. Where was the free market when Enron took advantage of deregulated electricity in California to manufacture brown-outs and conduct unethical trading on the chaos? Where was the free market when Goldman Sachs knowingly contributed to the economic crisis in advance through their own arbitrage? Where was the free market when new, poorly-understood derivatives were created, and where was it when bad debt was segmented and sold as good debt? Where was the free market in real estate when an unprecedentedly huge bubble developed over the last several years?  I could go in interminably about corporate and business abuses of human rights and ethics, and I'd probably end up breaching the per-post character limit of this forum. I wouldn't even begin to have touched market efficiency, and why markets aren't efficient and economically sound, but are instead dominated by wealth-capture arbitrage, human irrationality and fallibility, and greedy motives that cross economic self-interest into piracy—best exemplified lately by massive hedge funds.

Business is capable and willing to commit evil in the name of the "free market" and self-interest. It was government that stepped in and cleaned up and moved out Love Canal in New York after its corruption. It was government that stepped in and cleaned up the food processing industry around the turn of the century. It was government that codified into law essential labor standards. It was government that established the SEC to crack down on insider training that punished stockholders. It was government that created the Sarbanes-Oxley act after the crises of the turn of this century (an act that business has bitched about ever since). And it was government that injected liquidity into the system and narrowly prevented a worldwide economic meltdown last September. If you'll notice, these are all reactionary events in which government is cleaning up business's mess. Government has also failed many times to curtail the excesses of business, most recently providing too much forbearance to institutions in the S&L crisis and championing deregulation that helped create the current problem.

Business is even arguably more capable of evil than government because of globalization. Multinationals can cow third-world governments, operate sweatshops and other deplorable practices, and commit other abuses; their activities have been one of the strongest reasons that governments and unions have called for international accounting standards. Things like Bayer's dumping of contaminated medicine in poor countries that caused widespread disease, Rio Tinto's destabilization of Papa New Guinea, or United Fruit's rapacious activities in South America fly under the radar of the American public's concern. The last big shakeup here over an American multinational's actions I can remember is the outrage over Blackwater in Iraq.

I'm not surprised by the lack of criticism of business, since criticizing it, the free market, etc. is inviting accusations of being a "socialist" or unamerican or a hippie, and because Libertarians and Republicans have utter, blind faith in business. It's the same shills in business school; my classmates are almost all unfailingly red-blooded boors who dream of owning their mini-mansion and fast cars, humanity and social policy be damned. We watched the documentary on Enron in one of my recent classes; the two tax major libertarians next to me smiled wide when a clip of Reagan played, and then disappeared into some kind of catatonic shock as the evidence of Enron's abuses of the "free" market mounted. Finance majors are taught how to arbitrage the most money; tax majors are taught how to deny the government its taxes, with the justification that "if a loophole exists, we're doing a good job by exploiting it"; marketing majors are taught how to tap into the lowest common denominator and unleash consumerist idiocy; management majors are taught how to whip inferiors into shape. I'm thankful I'm an accounting major, because anything other than accounting or business information systems would have probably repulsed me out of business school.

I just wonder how these free market advocates can despise the government so much while ignoring business's long and morbidly disturbing history of abuse and the good work government has done curbing them. When I came out of being a religious Republican fuckwad, I passed through my own libertarian phase, and it really just feels like a cult of tying in self-determination and individualism with the romantic idea of business and the American dream, with the total, irrational demonization of all government. It's very easy to feel that way; at the most basic level, government is gonna TAKE UR HARD-EARNED CASH that you earned working at a business, and most people don't give enough of a damn about politics or humanity to comprehend why taxation, government, and social policy are tremendously good things. If they bothered with an actual business education or a serious understanding of the Federal Reserve, they might realize that the market isn't as efficient as it's romanticized to be, or the Federal Reserve as evil. They might also realize how much of it is insane financial wizardry and runaway falsity; if more people knew, perhaps the CNBC channel would be taken off the air to celebration. Gordon Gekko summed it up well in Wall Street:

Quote
Gordon Gekko: The richest one percent of this country owns half our country's wealth, five trillion dollars. One third of that comes from hard work, two thirds comes from inheritance, interest on interest accumulating to widows and idiot sons and what I do, stock and real estate speculation. It's bullshit. You got ninety percent of the American public out there with little or no net worth. I create nothing. I own. We make the rules, pal. The news, war, peace, famine, upheaval, the price per paper clip. We pick that rabbit out of the hat while everybody sits out there wondering how the hell we did it. Now you're not naive enough to think we're living in a democracy, are you buddy? It's the free market. And you're a part of it. You've got that killer instinct. Stick around pal, I've still got a lot to teach you.

It's the same thing that finance majors dream of: manipulating the market to steal wealth created by the businesses and employees involved. It's like foreign exchange; a diversity of currencies only creates inefficiencies in civilization. Some exchange arbitrageur is getting rich off exchange transactions while millions of people depending on them to travel or commute (like in Europe, where people live close to borders and commute often) get screwed over bit by bit.

Business is not some infallible dream of self-determination, efficient markets, and sensible economics, and it has no better claim to be the driver of humanity than government does. Both human institutions have committed good and evil, and should be approached rationally and neutrally in debate. This is too great a leap required of most Republicans and Libertarians, and the situation only got worse when wingnut Ron Paul and other tin-foilers categorically attacked the Federal Reserve and espoused ludicrous economic policy like the restoration of the gold standard. This was all done with the same infatuation with business and hatred of government. Though it's not necessarily the position I advocate, any libertarian should be able to realize that all institutions and organizations, not only governments, amplify human effort for better or worse, and that business and government should have checks and balances on each other, just like the intra-government checks and balances that they adore.

A good starting point for realizing the market is inefficient is http://www.amazon.com/Animal-Spirits-Psychology-Economy-Capitalism/dp/0691142335. And Gordon Gekko will return in Money Never Sleeps, a sequel to Wall Street focusing on the abuses of hedge funds: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1027718/
« Last Edit: July 12, 2009, 03:40:40 am by ZeaLitY »

Truthordeal

  • Dimension Crosser (+1000)
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Dunno what's supposed to go here. Oh now I see.
    • View Profile
    • Youtube Account
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #176 on: July 12, 2009, 03:44:49 am »
All the medical system needs is two words: Tort Reform.

Stop the idiots from winning multi-million dollars over a $30 procedure and artificially inflating medical malpractice insurance and that'll do a hell of a lot of good.

And most hospitals are run by the private sector right about now anyway, but that's probably for the best. One swift kick to the kneecap of the medical malpractice insurance debacle and things will start picking up.

But, you're a statist and I'm a libertarian, so we're probably going to advocate different approaches and solutions. Meh.

And of course Zeality tries to twist my views against me, after specifically stating that it should be the parents and the doctors decision not the government's. Libertarians love the individual and the family structure, and we know when we should take advice from people who have more knowledge(i.e., doctors on whether or not to circumcise or have an abortion).

And no, Zeality, the free market is much less vulnerable to corruption due to the infinite number of checks and balances. If one party gets too powerful, others collude against it. If one becomes corrupt, it won't last long without shaping up.

And yes, you can bring up an infinite number of examples against the free market. But the difference between the free market and the government is that you can take away power from the free market, but once you give power to the government, it stays there. That, and the free market appeals to the needs of the people. Why should the government, after that new power is commandeered? The answer is it doesn't, which is where we are right now.

ZeaLitY

  • Entity
  • End of Timer (+10000)
  • *
  • Posts: 10795
  • Spring Breeze Dancin'
    • View Profile
    • My Compendium Staff Profile
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #177 on: July 12, 2009, 04:03:59 am »
Heh, well, I just won a bet among friends. You're good at completely writing off arguments and leagues of compelling evidence with sheer intellectual incuriosity. You've done it now for religion, abortion, sexism, and economic theory. To put it in business terms, you'll soon have a monopoly of ignorance on current issues, oh-hoh!

Quote
that it should be the parents and the doctors decision not the government's.

It should be the person who's getting the circumcision's decision. If you're so bent on individual rights, give them to the individual, especially when they involve painful amputation of part of a sex organ.

Edit: Whoops! I forgot to post something above. Here's a real Republican:



Committed to American ideals such that he busted abusive trusts and laid the foundation for the Food and Drug administration.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2009, 04:13:43 am by ZeaLitY »

IAmSerge

  • Temporal Warrior (+900)
  • *
  • Posts: 964
    • View Profile
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #178 on: July 12, 2009, 06:40:40 am »
I stopped arguing because you guys care WAY too much about this shit.

Oh, sorry, correction.

You guys care alot about it, but rather than getting out there and doing something about it all you do is sit on your computer and argue about it over the internet, which really gets you no where.
Springtime of youth my ass....

ZaichikArky

  • Mystical Knight (+700)
  • *
  • Posts: 718
    • View Profile
    • Livejournal
Re: Fuck Sexism
« Reply #179 on: July 12, 2009, 07:08:46 am »
Serge, you're kind of right, but there is somewhat of a purpose to arguing about things on the internet. The argument between me + Truth vs Z is not really going anywhere, but I can say that by reading about others opinions and "facts", we learn more and become more educated and thus our perception of the world changes. So by having these arguments on the internets, we are actually doing something about the problems that occur in the world. Z said himself that one reason he became completely atheist is because Lord J and some others helped him "see the light" or whatever. He might have come to where he is without them, but they helped him along and that's what matters.

I think that if people can influence you to change your mind, the world will change. Maybe Z believes that the more people who understand about how circumcision is traumatic mutilation, the practice will occur less and less. I don't really know what he hopes to gain by arguing this, but that's my guess anyway. But since me and Truth have already established our own opinions of the matter, Z's adamant stand is not really affecting us, however it could affect others...

I honestly don't have the passion to try to do something about the terrible things happening in the world. I leave that up to others for the most part. I donate money, and I've gone to protests before, but I'm not going to dedicate my life to fighting some cause that I'm not passionate over. I'm most passionate about the degrading state of the environment, however if I was a real environmentalist, the most I could do to help the environment on a personal level is to become vegetarian, and I'm not really willing to make such a life change.

So arguing about things on the internet doesn't really do much, but it at least exposes people on other peoples view points and sometimes it helps change minds... so it does enough for me. Besides, I like debate. I don't like pointless bickering so much which is kind of what this is boiling down to...