The answer to sad males when circumcision makes sad males sad.

Whenever women speak about FGM, and about how males invented a religion to force women into cutting their girl children, under threat of punishment from an angry, male god, solely to punish girls for being born in a superior female body, males always show up and begin screeching WHATABOUTZTHEPENISZ, CIRCUMCISION IS BADZ, TOO, WAAHWAAHWAAH.

That’s a good time to remind the upset boys that males invented the male god and the religion that invented circumcision.

Why do they crycry at women? Women didn’t invent religion. Males did. And here is what males wrote into their fairytale……

99 Then God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring. 13 Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male, who

has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.

Males made that up. Just like males made up FGM.

Why on earth do males cry at us about the OMG EBILS OF CUTTING DICKS when Women would never have thought about something like that? Males need to take that shit up with other males.

This circumcision ritual seems to be just an invented reason for males to touch infant boys. Why else would they invent this? And then cry at us about it. Also, it seems like I have heard somewhere that adult males eat the foreskin of babies? And I also have heard about a Bible story that was about dudes saving foreskins? Like, as a hobby. But that’s a little too much dick, for me. Not going to spend any time verifying that male nastiness, lol.


20 thoughts on “The answer to sad males when circumcision makes sad males sad.

  1. All circumcision is to hurt women. Regardless of whether it’s done to women or men. Male circumcision doesn’t hurt most men as much as the women they are fucking, they just bang away with their desensitized dicks and hurt the women. Dudes who haven’t been mutilated have to be more gentle or they will hurt themselves too. A while ago I saw a woman speculating that the original purpose of circumcision was so men could rape easier and I believe this to be true. By removing the sensitive foreskin that can get hurt they are better able to rape without their own pain and discomfort affecting them.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. With the most extreme form of FGM the entire vulva is removed and sewn closed. A reed or straw is placed inside the wound, leaving an opening in the scar tissue so that the girl can pass urine. She is cut open and intubated again later to pass menstrual fluid. The woman’s husband cuts her open for sex on their wedding night (and who knows how many times after that) and she is cut open again to birth children. It is a chastity belt made of the women’s own flesh. I’m not sure where the less extreme forms came from. I’m not even sure the purpose is to make women not desire or enjoy sex, as much as it is to ensure that the women cannot be raped and used by males before marriage. This is the only way men have to keep other men from raping and using their girls and women. If they blame women’s libidos for this practice, they are being ahistorical, and dishonest. And I’m pretty sure Dworkin reported that Rabbis stop the bleeding from male babies’ circumcisions by sucking on the wound. This is all 100% about men, like you say. And I think kaguya is mistaken about the primary goal of FGM, at least the most extreme form. There are 3 levels, the kindest one only removes the clitoris.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I can imagine that being a source of terrible chronic pain, yes. Especially if the scar tissue is repeatedly disturbed (cut through, and then left to heal again). Now that I think about the lesser 2 levels, and why those might’ve come about, I suspect that was so that the girls can be used by men before marriage, afterall. Specifically, but not exclusively, the girls’ male relatives. The kindest form “only” removes the clitoris, while the next level takes the clitoris and the labia minora (inner lips). The most extreme form takes the clitoris, and the labia minora and labia majora (inner and outer lips both). I’m unsure whether the “middle” level would physically prevent penetration, (whether it’s sewn closed like the worst one) but the kindest level would not prevent it. Now that my mind is wandering, I am wondering if the “less extreme” forms were a “progressive” Western influence, that makes it seem kinder, but really is the worst of both worlds, giving the girls less or no protection from rape, while still severely and ritualistically harming them. Would it be better to have the flesh chastity belt, or not? These are the issues with FGM, issues that are not shared with male circumcision, whether or not the boys are sexually abused in the process. Males aren’t penetrated regardless, and any permanent or serious loss of function for males is a bug, not a feature, of the practice. It does happen, but it’s not the point, like when they have lifelong problems urinating or having erections due to a botched surgery. With FGM, lifelong dysfunction is a feature, not a bug.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Circumcision is about male wants and needs, and fgm is also only about male wants and needs.

        However they choose to cut, how severe it is, you know that the girl that they are mutilating doesn’t even come into the equation, because she is just some random male’s property.

        It’s my personal opinion that males that purposely cut the clitoris are especially heinous assholes, because the clitoris is so sensitive and also because that is the main way that female bodies experience sexual pleasure.

        They are insuring that, even if she can heal, which is doubtful, then she will maybe never be able to enjoy sex.

        Males hate the clitoris, it’s only purpose is pleasure, and males have nothing like that. It’s on the outside, they hate that. And everyone knows that women orgasm very quickly either alone or with each other, but males can’t manage it as well or as much and it’s right there, in front of them, and easy to find and touch, and even so, males still fail at making us orgasm more often than not.

        Males are sick and selfish.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Let me chime in again with my new daily mantra, “Take it all!!!!!”

        There is absolutely no purpose for peni (unofficial plural of penis), if you look at it from an objective point of view. Not needed for breeding, which is the only argument someone might make objectively. They only cause problems. Problems women and girls. Maybe a few boys, whatev.

        Personally, if men really have to walk the planet, I want them smooth as Ken, the barbie doll. No scrote, no peen. I’d allow them a pee hole for sitting down and an asshole for pooping. And no substituting the peen for something that would get them to scream ‘tranz!’

        But then again, if I had my way, they wouldn’t exist at all. They add nothing to this world that isn’t done the same or better by a woman. Not a single one of them makes me happy that men exist.


    1. There are actually more than three forms, they just group then together like that. The mildest form of cutting only removes the clitoral hood. There are also forms where they just prick the women’s skin without cutting anything off, this is mostly a compromise with people trying to stop it, though some rituals like that are older. I think even more than being a chastity belt, it’s to create a painful disability. Most forms will cause constant pain that the woman can’t ignore, it takes away her thoughts because she’s focused on pain and limits her movement because moving around or even sitting will be painful. It all adds to making women more helpless and dependent.


  3. There is a fascinating element to FGM:

    Victims of it ‘re still capable of orgasm + all the wondrous, floaty + ( lacking in words here ) female eroticism

    All that -…& it still fails in its’ primary goal

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Plus it’s almost always the father that wants the infant son cut–it’s usually the mother that doesn’t want to inflict pain/risky, medically unnecessary surgery/mutilation on a child. The father is like “OMG foreskins are gross”

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Exactly.

      It’s another case of male reversal. And of males holding both positions simultaneously, that circumcision is bad and women are responsible for it, while males invented it and perpetuate it.

      Males just like bashing women, and they spend a lot of time making shit up just to do it. Even when it makes no sense.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Yeah the circumcision thing is between men and their god. I’ve read that removing the foreskin makes jerking off more difficult for men. Keeps them focused on the god-approved way of getting off—old fashioned PIV. And that leads to impregnating women thus the mommy/slave. As always men want more babies so they can have infinite choices of who to abuse.

    Like Storyending, I too believe that most men would prefer male on male sex but they need to keep women under control for reproduction and subservience hence the focus on us for sex.

    Maybe one day they’ll be satisfied with lady-dicks but I doubt it.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Freud said that part of the reason that women have peen envy is because males have morals because they have a dick.


      And women can’t have morals because we don’t have a dick.

      More LULZ.

      Because the female reproductive system can actually create an entire person. But males can pee standing up.

      LULZ. I can’t even. I don’t know what is funnier, assigning males a moral compass, or claiming that males not only have morals, but that morals come from having a piece of floppy crotch flesh to scratch while watching TV or to piss from.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. I’ve always wondered how males came up with such a bizarre and specific ritual. The Sacred Foreskin. I mean jeez, what a weird part of the anatomy. I agree with you that it gave men the chance to get up close and personal with baby dick. Most of what men get the most pissy about is the reminder that every single one of them has the gay as well as the pedophile in him. I don’t believe in ‘straight’ when it comes to men. They screw what will accommodate them – total pragmatism and predation. Omnisexuality.

    Anyhow, I feel they didn’t take it far enough. “God wants your dick!!!” Take it all. The rape stick isn’t necessary for breeding, and certainly isn’t capable of anything else whatsoever.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. I could do it. I used to do animal research, so I was always chopping and dissecting one thing or another. But I want it to be a paid position. I’m tired of volunteer work.

        And I need an alternative title to ‘mohel’ to account for the extra parts I’m slicing and dicing.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s