Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland
They're clearly not equivalent in more than one way. For one, FGM is not even practiced in my culture and looks to be 100% vilified by everyone, while male circumcision is incredibly rampant in my society and seems to be accepted as absolutely fine by 75% or more of people (estimate). Does FGM still suck chrome donkey balls? See my 100% number. That doesn't mean that anything less than FGM is no longer an issue.
Like anything else, it being used as a talking point by a side that you don't like (nor I for that matter) does not mean that the idea is inherently wrong. I don't think I'm implying an equivalency here, I think you're just inferring too much. It's easy to get swept up in the bigger picture, these conversations get abstract fast. I end up doing it all the time.
|
I can agree with this. I'm still not a fan of applying visceral language to issues that don't warrant it - it's part of broader trend of hyperbole in public discourse, but I think we're more or less aligned on this issue. You enjoy playing the contrarian and I appreciate that. Keeps me honest
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Goofle
Frownland, stop arguing for the human rights of men before you get put in the same box as Alt-Right Nazi's.
|
I would like to have a real conversation with you, but you keep setting up these strawmen. I have never said that thinking circumcision is barbaric equates to being an 'alt-right Nazi'. I have said that the language used by MRA groups is purposeful and allows them to make an equivalency with FGM. This then gives them a leg, albeit a wobbly one, to stand on when they claim that feminism/women's issues get more play than men's - after all, both sexes are butchered. To my mind, this is pure sophistry for the reasons I've explained previously.
It's fine that we disagree. I welcome disagreement. Had a great back and forth with Frownland. He doesn't invent positions that I've "taken". He responds to what I actually say/type.