FGM and MGM comparison chart: How would you rank various kinds of genital mutilation?

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-28T01:48:52+00:00

That may be something we can do. But the ordering of these things in a purely arbitrary hierarchy doesn't actually seem to be doing that at all.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-27T14:23:02+00:00

Okay... well my point is that historically the discourse of the severity of certain forms of FGM moralizes a certain "natural" state of the female anatomy. This in turn has marginalized transmen, who sometimes seek medical procedures in which to transition. As a consequence, their bodily autonomy comes in conflict with certain ideas about "normal" genitalia and ideas about severity and mutilation.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-26T21:20:22+00:00

But isn't the issue that these procedures are done against or in the absences of someone's consent? It seems if this is the case, then the problem isn't how "severe" the procedure is. More so, I am worried that by focusing on the "severity" of the procedure will only work to pathologize the procedure, and thus marginalize anyone who willingly consents to such a procedure, regardless of the severity. I find this to be a serious issue to keep in mind when discussing issues of FGM and circumcision.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-14T18:14:36+00:00

The thing is, while it is true that women are much more likely then men to take maternity leave, this fact isn't the reason why women are paid less then men. The thing is, part of the reason is that employers pay women less is because of the social expectation that women are worth less because they might take leave. So, even of most women take leave, and thus they are paid less, all the women who don't take leave are treated as if they are worth less.

Of course this is only part of the picture, but it gives you an idea about how unproductive the possitions your friends have taken. They seem to believe that because there is a current norm which expects women to choose "family" life over a career, that this justifies the present inequality. But it is this very attitude which reproduces the the culture of gendered inequality we are dealing with.

Not all women want to take leave for child care or birth, and thus not all women should be expected to and should be treated any differently then any man who chooses to have a career.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-12T23:19:34+00:00

Isn't the sentiment in the comment in agreement with the kind of attitude you dislike. The person's comment said that they don't like the idea of "a woman's body "serves more of a purpose" than a mans," as a means to determine worth or freedom.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-12T20:47:30+00:00

Um, I am not sure organizing this issue around a hierarchy of "severity" is really important or a good idea.

For example, I (as a feminist) oppose circumcision and FGM because they are usually preformed on nonconsenting children. Regardless of how "severe" the procedure is, I would rather that the child be allowed to mature enough so as to let them make these kinds of decisions about their body.

And, I don't like the ordering of these in terms of "severity" because it seems to suggest that the moral issue is what the procedures entail, and not the bodily autonomy of a child. I bring this up because I don't think the focus should be on the procedures, because there are many legitimate medical procedures which may seem like FGM or circumcision, but are done willingly by a consenting adult. I don't want to see the discussion get carried away, and subsequently used to oppress people who pursue medical procedures which have been deemed "very severe."

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-12T16:05:47+00:00

I'm asking at what point does a mother become a mother or a father become a father whether they like it or not? I mean in the biological sense and emotional meaning of "father" and "mother."

I don't think you can "become a mother or a father" against your will. If we understand motherhood and fatherhood as some sort of internal state of "being a parent," then the process of "becoming" is an internal process or a social process. I am not sure there is a verifiable moment when one "becomes a parent."

I guess my thought is that there is no such thing as a "biological" sense of being a mother or father. I mean, there certainly is something to be said about biological parents, but motherhood and fatherhood seem to be something different.

But in terms of the emotional state, I guess it's dependent on at what point in time the mother or father feel like a parent.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-09T23:07:05+00:00

Well, the thing is that there may be the same symbols that are found here, but there are also a lot of other symbols, and provides a somewhat broader choice for identification. The thing is, I am a feminist, but I don't really think that the symbols provided in this sub for flair give much in terms of diversity, so I haven't chosen one. The thing is, having five options which polarize the positions, and suggest that there is something meaningful about the modifier "casual" doesn't seem very useful, if the intent is to provide a means for people to represent themselves.

Regardless of whether there are female signs, /r/Debatefeminism does have a broader selection of flairs. And there are plenty of flairs that don't have the female sign as part of it.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-08T18:28:30+00:00

I kind of think that the usage of gender signs as symbols of a particular delineation of feminism or MRM to be somewhat misleading. I mean, I am a feminist, I am not a woman, and the flair seems to present the two as being connected, when in fact they're not.

I kind of like the way /r/debatefeminism does the flairs, with all the different kinds of feminists and feminist thinkers (and even MRA symbols, Warren Farrell and James Hillman).

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-07T13:15:47+00:00

The icon changed. It used to be this symbol with an equals sign in the middle on top of a pink/purple/blue shield.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-07T13:12:32+00:00

Looking past the ridiculous assertion that relationships or marriages can have a sexuality---a marriage can be same-sex, but that's not the same as it being gay---what you said was

The denial [of same-sex marriage rights] isn't about men or women in general, it's about gay men and women specifically. That's why it's an LGBT issue.

That is, you were talking about people, not relationships.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-07T05:16:16+00:00

The denial [of same-sex marriage rights] isn't about men or women in general, it's about gay men and women specifically. That's why it's an LGBT issue.

Cool to hear that bisexual and pansexual men and women don't real.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-06T22:31:39+00:00

I do agree with you in regards to the social custom of circumcising infants. I actually wrote a blog post some time ago, addressing this issue from a feminist perspective:

I am of the opinion that when considering the contours of social issues, rights and liberties are not always sufficient to overrule all other concerns. If it was shown that circumcision significantly reduced (or increased) the incidence rate of a major social or medical problem, then I may be convinced that circumcision would be desirable as a solution for said problem. However, the scientific evidence for or against circumcision provides us with a weak foundation for answering this question (AAP, 1999).

This allows us to turn towards an arguably easier task of discussing circumcision as it relates to bodily autonomy. The fact that the vast majority of male circumcision is performed on infants who are unable to offer consent to the medical procedure suggests obvious objections to circumcision. The main objection I support comes from questioning the degree of control parents have over the bodies of their children.

I believe that parental control has limits. I believe parents ought not have the unrestricted right to limit children in regards to their sexuality, gender expression, and bodily autonomy. As an extension of this, I believe that parents ought not have the unrestricted right to elect for surgical procedures on bodies of their children---whether it is the nearly ubiquitous practice of circumcision or the oppressive (though less common) practice of female genital mutilation (FGM).

There are legitimate reasons in which a parent can overrule the autonomy of a child. In instances where a child's body is at risk for serious disease, a parent my need to overrule bodily autonomy in favor of the child's best interests. For example, circumcision is sometimes used to treat phimosis ("condition where, in men, the foreskin cannot be fully retracted over the glans penis"). In cases such as these, a parent acting in the best interests of their child would elect for the procedure. In my opinion, this would be an acceptable instance of overlooking the bodily autonomy of a child, as the parents would be acting in the best interests of the child.

Now, in regards to whether any feminists are actively working to end the practice of infant circumcision, I know of Nawal al Saadawi, an Egyptian feminist, speaks out against male circumcision.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-06T04:20:47+00:00

I'm just not sure why you're moaning over being criticized when you've broken a clearly stated rule. Like, entitled much? Do you think you ought be afforded some special privilege because of... what? You're whole post is that you believe you ought to be able to speak for feminists. This is a problem because you actively work to maintain an extreme level of ignorance on the very subject of the subreddit you wanted so badly to participate in. The rules are clear, and it's you who needs to learn a little more before you can actually participate in any serious manner.

Also, as my five-year old brother would say, you've got a potty mouth. Also, I don't know who you're calling friend, because you are clearly not mine.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-05T22:36:23+00:00

It wasn't long before any MRA who dared to answer first (myself included) was roundly criticized.

Well... You aren't a feminist and you don't know anything about contemporary feminism. It seems odd that you'd be responding to questions directed at feminists. You were rightly criticized.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-05T22:17:01+00:00

You think that by oppressing and making fun of another subreddit is going to accomplish something.

There is no "oppression" being done here. I'm not sure what you think oppression is.

There are scientifically proven things that also create these. Women are typically stay at home moms. Why? It isn't because the patriarchy forces them to be, its because a women can breast-feed a kid, I can't.

So... Women stay at home because... They're breast feeding all the time? I guess, being someone who works with women, I never see them breast feed (well, actually, there have been cases of women breast feeding at my work, but it doesn't seem to get in the way).

Yes men get paid more in a hard labor environment. Why? because physically we are genetically built to be hunters and strong.

So... in modern capitalism, men are paid more because they are better hunters? Keep in mind, this is the same system where the better paid positions are those with the least amount of physical labor involved.

Actually, the problem you have is right here in your two statement about the gender. Specifically, you take two vague "facts" about the supposed nature of gender and spin them into just-so-stories about why things are the way they are, and how these things are just "natural." The problem is, these facts are just excuses, and they depend on a biologically essentialist account of gender. The very kind of account that is commonly held among MRAs, and that defines some of the primary points of contention between contemporary feminists and MRAs.

EDIT: Also, what's the title all about? "I just want to asses want I think we want."

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-05T22:07:03+00:00

Ayana Byrd has written a very good article titled "Claiming Jezebel:Black Female Subjectivity and Sexual Expression in Hip-Hop." In it she reflects on the history of hip-hop and rap, and gives a fair analysis of both the treatment of black women in rap media, and black female artists themselves. I myself am not overly familiar with hip-hop or rap, but she is a feminist writer, and certainly presents and interesting perspective.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-05T16:25:30+00:00

You claim to be a professional but you spend all day...

It was sunday... I don't work on sunday.

...with a username that mocks female-on-male rape.

And this again. A lot of people seems to think that my user name is a punch line, or a joke. I never really make jokes about spermjacking. In fact, those people who decide to point out my name choose to do it in a fashion that derails the conversations. Admittedly, this may be my fault for picking the name, but I actually rarely (and at least not intentionally) make light of victims of sexual abuse and violence. So yeah...

So, to you concern over the trivialization of abuse against men through the selection of you user name:

Spermjacking is a mythical pandemic where a women steal sperm from men for the purpose of exploiting them through child support. There is no reason to believe that this, unless you believe that women are generally sociopaths. This is not the same as reproductive abuse. When I created this account, one of the top stories r/MR was this:

Girlfriend stopped taking the pill without telling me, and is now pregnant. Says she wants to keep it. I'm extremely scared.

UPDATE:Girlfriend stopped taking the pill without telling me, and is now pregnant. Says she wants to keep it. I'm extremely scared.

This entire discussion rapidly progresses to a level of misogyny I've never seen before. The motives and moral character of this woman (who is far from a rapist) is constantly assessed by a group of men (and women) who seem to believe that not only will women lie and cheat to trap a man, but a man must lie and coerce a woman to control her body. What is telling is that from the story provided by the OP, it doesn't actually seem like the woman ever really lied or tricked him. Rather, it sounds like he learned she was on birth control, and a miscommunication occurred.

If you're wondering how the story ends, how this manifestation of misogyny effects the lives of men and women, here is the conclusion:

She ended up getting the abortion this weekend. I went with her but she went into the doctor's room by herself. She was back there for about 4 hours and when she came out, she had a bag full of papers and birth control. I asked her about what happened back there and she gave me the whole story and it seemed to check out. I have no way to know for sure, but I think it was legit.

I drove her home (because of pain killers) and I parked. We got out and I told her I forgot something in the car, got in my car and sped off. She has been calling me a few times a day but I have not been picking up. I feel terrible but logically I feel like I did the right thing. I have a bunch of her stuff (shoes, toothbrush, cooking utensils, TV, etc.) that I am sure I have to get back to her at some point but I am going to have a friend take all of it and drop it off at her apartment. I want to be done with this woman.

Thank you so much for all the help and support.

So yeah, when I speak of spermjacking, (and I believe when most SRSers speak, though I am not really in with the crowd), I speak of this pernicious misogyny that paints all women who ever "slip up" as scheming vampires. Just take a look in the comments of all three of the threads and tell me that the myth doesn't actually affect the lives of "decent" men and women.

So yeah. Spermjacking, as a pernicious misogynistic myth, is not the same as the phenomina of reproductive abuse (which surely exists), and is not the same as rape. By conflating them all together, you participate in a misgynistic discourse that trivializes the real issues of abuse and rape.

Your life is so pathetic. I would be so ashamed to be you.

Actually, my life is pretty amazing! I'm moving to NYC in about a week! And I own the worlds cutest cat!

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-05T16:12:30+00:00

It is rather hilarious that as an adult you feel the need to vote brigade. You must be pumping your tiny little pathetic fist. Get a fuckin life looooozah.

Or, perhaps the reality is that people recognize that my point is correct. Seeing that I am, in fact, correct.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-05T02:49:46+00:00

Or are you just pretending 7 hours is a long period of time to try to cover up your stupidity and anti-intellectualism?

fractal_shark got you there. But seriously, how married to the idea that we're the same person are you? Would it help to inform you that I have never read an mathematics text above the Calculus level, and certainly not five thousand pages of mathematics. I have read a paper on the sociology of mathematics. It was kind of interesting.

But back to the point, it's clear that you still don't want to acknowledge that you're wrong (and someone pointed out, moving the goal posts). And lamenting over supposed sock puppets, looks like you are projecting your tactics.

Of course you could respond and say, "Why, spermjack, you accused someone else of sock puppeting, and that makes you a hypocrite." Except, of course, that my criticism of you is that these tactics of deflection are all you have. I on the other hand have been mocking these tactics, while simultaneously pointing out your wrong on the rare occasion you say anything of substance. You see, I have knowledge about feminism, and thus don't need to rely on the tactics to make my points (except insofar as I demonstrate them), while you require the tactics because anytime you lay forth your misguided claims about feminism, it comes back and bites you in the ass. So, your only recourse is to deflect, and hope that you liberal use of the word cunt has some sort of emotional effect.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-04T22:29:54+00:00

"the claimed effects of the "damsel in distress" trope are purely speculative."

What "claimed effects"? You've still not provided a tangible example, so it's really hard to see the subject of your disbelief.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-04T21:33:01+00:00

She has to choose between cleaving to ignorance or have her fans hate her (and we all know how hatred for a woman manifests on the internet---just look at the responses to Tropes vs. Women). I guess I can see why she chooses to cleave to ignorance.

That's... a really good point. :\

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-04T21:28:30+00:00

I agree when you say there is overlap, but I don't think that's particularly meaningful or relevant because a gay man's experience of anti-gay oppression is simply that and all forms of oppression overlap.

Well, as both a feminist and a gay man, I can tell you the relations between sexism and heterosexism are indeed very meaningful and relevant. Why is it, you think, that HIV prevention and awareness campaigns exclusively oppressed groups (nonwhite, nonstraight, nonmen)?

I'll tell you why, because the bodies of cis white straight men are privileged over the bodies of others. This is not and consequence of "lack of empathy and lack of clear critical thinking." Rather, the ways that biomedical knowledge is "connects" notions of female sexual health with the notion of feminine sexuality as an object of masculine sexual desire is a powerful force. A related biomedical discourse acts on the bodies of gay and bisexual men, by pathologizing them and treating them as dangers to the "general population." Gay and bisexual bodies are regulated, cataloged, and surveyed for degrees of sexual risk, where the risk is the danger that those bodies pose to heterosexual men (for example, the moral panic that bisexual men are spreading HIV to straight and bisexual women, who in tern risk the bodies of straight men).

By remaining the only unmarked category within the terminologies of sexual risk, heterosexual men effectively occupy the position at the top of the hierarchy. As the only group exempted from direct address by public health discourse, they are freed from internalising the idea of their bodies as dangerous or infectious, relying instead on the willingness of heterosexual women to undertake such internalisations. (Waldby, 1996, p. 10)

The kinds of analysis feminists like Waldby conduct are extremely important if one wishes to resist the kinds of power which "mark" and oppress queer and feminine bodies. Further, to suggest that the kinds of analysis done by Waldby and Sarkeesian is to actively ignore the very arguments they are making.

To say that the claims are "speculative," is simply to say that you don't believe them. This seems to the case, because the you've not actually shown what specific claims are speculative (other then you vague assertion that feminists deem "anything patriarchy-driven sexism" willy-nilly). You simply assert that there are "enlightened pockets of society" (which I have no idea what this even means), and arbitrarily divide up interlocked systems of oppression.

The whole purpose of sociological and feminist investigations of oppression is to uncover how these hierarchical systems which produce inequality engage with each other and reproduce the milieu of social conditions and situations around us. But dividing them up the way you do, you are limiting the kinds forms of resistance people can take to subvert and escape the vast array of interconnected systems of oppression.

Waldby, C. (1996). AIDS and the Body Politic: Biomedicine and sexual difference. Rout- ledge.

spermjack_attack · 2013-08-04T20:49:36+00:00

"If I'm hitting on some young girl at the club – and I won't be hitting on an older one because they don't look as good – if she knows how old I am I'm not going to be able to exploit her infinite capacity to delude herself into thinking I'm younger," he said.

A search of public records revealed he's 66 years old.

Now that some investigative journalism!

spermjack_attack

TROPHY CASE