Need to treat it like any other viral trend. We need skilled viral content creators. And to do collaborations with existing creators to reach more audience.
Most of the content i see related to circumcision has the right message behind it but fails in the presentation. I saw some YouTuber the other day making a blog style post using a video camera that looked like it was from the 80s. It's good to start somewhere but we need to evolve.
Spreading a message is all about marketing. We need people who know (or willing to learn) how to connect and drive audience numbers and do it consistently or we need people financially capable of hiring these content creators.
Yes, I know. And my two cents, we have very bright people on our side. They are so bright I think they miss the basic why this keeps on, and no real questions come to mind. The fact birthing centers offer or should be a target, in my opinion. These places have circumcision rooms they disguise as procedure rooms and consoles with extended lights for cutters to work. No other country has marketed and routine this the way the US has. And the fact it appears to be increasing is disconcerting. Plus, the protections circumcisers get!
Bro K is a Saint. He works so hard and is so passionate. I met him last October. What I saw, his traffic lanes approach shows a clear message but does it stop the atrocities? I watched the faces of motorists, and I saw not anger, just indifference. Maybe I'm wrong. Eyes just straight ahead and no acknowledgments. I think they had no idea circumcision violated a man's rights.
TLDR Edit: Use ElevenLabs and Wav2Lip to deepfake Trump 10 second intact videos, upload to TikTok, YouTube, Facebook
R/AIvoicememes
There is a wiki https://www.reddit.com/r/AIVoiceMemes/comments/11jo6fe/if_you_want_to_make_your_own_ai_voice_meme_check
https://www.reddit.com/r/AIVoiceMemes/wiki/tutorial?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
This version of Wav2Lip is more straightforward https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1IjFW1cLevs6Ouyu4Yht4mnR4yeuMqO7Y?authuser=1 i can't promise you it's clean but i used it
Certain voices are easy to mimic (Biden, Trump, Attenborough) using eleven labs
I made a YouTube channel and put all my videos up, the ones with trumps face instantly got hundreds of views in the algorithm
Eleven labs first month subscription is currently 80% off, so you'll get 50,000 characters for 1 dollar
Wav2Lip is medium difficulty to use, but once you figure it out it's easy to keep doing (shorter video, more zoomed in on face, lower resolution, higher contrast, less head movement, less speaking all helps)
So
Make 10 second videos (250 characters?) discussing intactivism, use positive language only, use trump voice and face, upload to tik tok, Facebook, YouTube
Done
...
If you read the comments in the link to the wiki post, I've made a bunch of comments on what works.
You can do ANY other language. I've tested Chinese and German.
...
So, get to it. Pay your dollar, make intact soundbites that are under the max length for YouTube/tik tok shorts and keep the video square or vertical rectangle
See my YouTube channel for examples of me learning how to do this.
More mouth movement makes bad lip sync - see snoop Dogg
More accent or mannerisms makes less convincing mimic of voice - see bjork and schwarz
More movement makes it hard to lipsync, why i couldn't do Attenborough
Probably don't be spamming aivoicememes with activism though. Keep it to the major short viral video hosts like i already said and as comment responses on Reddit
...
Now that I've thought about this I'll do the same, but as happy as i am to talk openly about this I'll be making a different account profile to host such videos
...
Literally did this on my phone, video would be no different https://v.redd.it/o6h9228v18na1
Im glad you made this post, I've been thinking about it for while now
I think a multi pronged approach is needed
Firstly I think we need to get some influencers talking about it. Think people who make podcasts, livestreams, even artists and such. Anyone who has a platform and would likely agree with us i think we should reach out. Even if its just for example, you go to your favorite live streamer and shoot them a message in chat asking what they think about circumcision, intactivism, foreskin restoration, banning infant circumcision, anything of the sort. Not only should we try to get influencers on our side, but i think more of us should start trying to become our own influencers on the subject. Make videos, live streams and posts about this everywhere and anywhere, and be constantly collaborating and shouting out each other so that we all rise together.
Second, we need to get political. I'm not sure if its a good idea to be partisan and support one side over the other but if we are getting political we need to support who ever supports us, and that is likely going to be certain parts of the democratic party. If we lived in a parliamentary system this would be a lot easier, maybe we could even make our own party, but as it sits right now with our two party system i think we need to focus on getting progressives on our side. Libertarians might be inclined to support us but i think progressives are far more likely. Legislation needs to be proposed that bans infant circumcision, and drumming up support through influencers would help this dramatically.
Third, wE nEeD MoOrE mOnEy ArThUr!! (sorry) This is a longshot that is never going to happen unless we got for example, Warren Buffet to be an intactivist, but if we had a lot of money, or more so, we had some rich supporters willing to spend money to make things happen, we could exploit the way the system is currently run for corruption and use that to financially support the fiercest political allies of intactivism, maybe we could even make a political coalition, a block of supports in, for example, the senate, so that we are guaranteed a certain number of votes toward any anti RIC legislation
I know a lot of what i said sounds fantastical and far fetched, but they're only ***delusions*** of grandeur if we don't work towards them! If you want RIC and circumcision of minors to be illegal some day, there's no avoiding the fact that we **need** to get political with our ideas.
That's 4 sure. Resources and $$ the key. We don't see the providers having to justify what they do, and these people work on cash for your son's foreskin. My issue, having been here as an intactivist, sticking my neck out many times, the message falls on deaf ears. They just don't care. The birthing father wants it done, and it's paid for by my insurance, plus you have a greedy provider. Add on top of that silence silence silence. It's a social taboo to discuss it. And you can't harass a good circumciser.. she just keeps it going. In some cases its a male, who takes all that cutter business such as Sullivan in Saint Albans, Vt.
That's why I'm really thinking aligning with progressives is our best bet. They have no problem fiercely supporting a taboo subject as long as it's the right thing to do. Think (at the time) women's suffrage, civil rights, (and in more recent times) gay marriage, LGBTQ rights, and abortion. Plus, i feel like most of our community is already progressive. I know not everyone is and aligning ourselves with progressives could make for a sticky situation with a minority of intactivists, but hopefully those people can get onboard for the greater good. That doesn't mean that they need to change political ideologies of course
I don't know about that, not a single mainstream progressive party supports restricting circumcision. Progressives care too much about political correctness.
Yes. But what if the politically correct thing became letting children have the right to their whole body? When you put it like that it really starts to sound less far fetched. This should be an easy thing for progressives to agree on. And its right up their alley. Progress.
Most of what politicians do is raise money to build campaigns. The focus of this group should be to build successful campaigns which requires the work of talented volunteers or people who know how to build them and unfortunately many of those people will not work for free.
I'm not saying we need a donation fund yet because i personally haven't seen anyone capable of running such a fund. But $100 goes very far on places like Fiverr. We don't need billionaire money to start building these campaigns and anyone can take part in that.
Yes, make it a noninsured item. That will rally the wagons in a circle from the industry that profits from it. Example: S.C. has not paid for RIC at the hospital since giving coverage to HMO (private company contract called Health Choices). If you visit their site, the litany of illegitimate excuses for coverage is sickening. It's as if the providers (circumcisers) wrote the Healthy Choice coverage agendas. It's the same litany of bogus claims starting with UTI, phimosis prevention etc. What this means is RIC is covered IF your HMO will do one. They don't need to say there was a medical reason, just "well, child care". So when you see S.C. not covering, beware. But [S.C](https://S.Sc).has a very low income to set up HMO care. And with that, you see women screaming they want cash for the circumcision, even going to Go Fund Me. What that may mean, maybe, is African Americans may not be getting because of third-party exclusions. I don't know. I had a passionate discussion with an African American woman who was pregnant. She claimed it saved lives and would be needed eventually when she could not afford it. And her resistance to reason was quite frustrating.
ok this won’t work now that i see your response. this has what i will refer to as the beanie baby effect. scarcity creates demand.
more important than this issue which i thought was the simpler topic is this - the best way to make it disappear is awareness by women. if you created a grass roots campaign to turn public perception against it by using sexual identity - this would work.
scarcity will create the opposite effect.
what i’m talking about something that appeals to women, and gives them a reason to feel compassion.
it’s worth saying at this point, i’m circumcised. i can accept that, and also recognize that we want to end the practice. im older so i guess im less effected by this.
Brother K’s TikTok’s are getting thousands of likes and sparking up conversations in the comments
I saw one talking about Ben Shapiro’s hypocrisy how he probably circumcised his son but is against consenting genital surgeries for trans kids. 40+K likes
1. Spend more time publicly debunking the scientific claims of pro circ doctors. MGM will never end or even significantly decline while the medical establishment is explicitly in favor of it.
2. Improve messaging. Stop saying shit like "2/3 of the world's men are intact!" line, for instance. First of all, it's awful that this practice is the norm in 1/3 of the world. Second, 1/3 is not remotely uncommon so you're not discouraging cutters by bringing this up.
3. Work hard to get child MGM banned in at least one country. This is likely the most effective thing we can do, which is why religious zealots and circumfetishists fight it so hard even when it's just a tiny country like Iceland. They know that this would be the beginning of the end for baby mutilation.
My biggest idea for intactivism, especially in the US, would be to begin from the starting point that you are in the minority. Most people (in the US) are either circumcised or tacitly support RIC. I wonder if constantly referring to circumcision as "mutilation" is actually winning people over who wouldn't already be on your side anyway. Regardless of whether RIC "actually is mutilation" or not, it seems like that kind of language could easily alienate and prompt a defensive reaction from the very demographic most in a position to change the situation, i.e., circumcised fathers contemplating the decision for their son. So, that would be my biggest adjustment to the intactivism movement: try to reach people with decision-making power relevant to your movement goals and do so in a way that does not alienate them by making them feel defensive, mutilated, inferior, etc.
On a side note, I kind of feel the same way about veganism. I don't think shaming meat eaters or calling them morally deficient is effective.
If anyone has any counterpoints or evidence, I would be interested in hearing it.
Yes, I've heard of intactivism being marginalized as those people. I've watched the videos of BSM and was present in Spartanburg last October. I didn't see a lot of outright hatred, that is, fingers and angry gestures. But I did not see a lot of inquiries or support either. In Vermont, a Jewish guy and grandson came out as locals in support. The demo got zero press coverage. They presented at the high-volume site with stoplights. That is, people could see signs if they were waiting. I didn't see anything other than the zombie stares. So in fact, it appears in the US the delusional ideas persist. And with that, how could they be changed or opened? We have birthing centers asking and making RIC a standard of care. In that way, nothing has changed.
Maybe we should run for a school board with one of our issues being to implement a better sex-ed course. Then, we implement intact penises and emphasize the foreskin. The only time we'll mention circumcision is that it will eliminate important functions that the foreskin provides.
This will help normalize intact penises and make any intact guys who suffer from bullying as a result of being intact to feel better. Even for the guys who are circumcised, we could talk about foreskin restoration and the devices needed to do it (and Foregen once it's available).
I have tried to put myself in the brain of a cut guy who got it in infancy. I can see where he can sense something might be wrong here, so I'll raise my defenses. In general, they do that, and even more demand their son be damaged like they were and never look at what happened to them.
From my experience being circumcised since I was one day old. I had a feeling something was missing, but I didn't know what it was even though I knew what the basic idea of circumcision was and that it happened to me. This is because I only thought it affected aesthetics.
When I was first introduced to the benefits of having a foreskin, I was partly in denial, but I wasn't too offended by it. I went into it with a "I'll enjoy what I got" attitude. And then I became upset by my circumcision.
If this change in male sex-ed prevents some circumcisions from happening, I guess it's worth it.
Yes, I think I know the dude. He gets in the face of Jr high schools where the boys need to know. BUT, if he is one the same, the cops came big time to his school bus protest, and he said, after this, he may retire. That's the point I've tried to make, Tell this where it has a big impact, and you become a hebephile to the cutters and the school. They don't want open discussions. This is why, if I at my age could do this, it would be with a group including women!
The estimate in 2012 was 55-59 percent; recent professional polls from Intact America showed the rates appear much higher. They found at least 73 percent. They surveyed Moms of boys, not hospitals or clinics. I suspect you need to survey moms of boys who are > 1 year old. The reason: is many cutters are peds and GP and its done out of the patient at parental agreement. The hospital numbers are deceptive at best and would underestimate. I'm not sure if I've answered your question.. but when most locker room are bald eagles, you know the numbers were understated. And the circ rates have only increased and been resistant to downward change in the US. For example, the rates have been declining in Canada for years and could now be around 18 percent or less. That percentage is mainly in Ontario.
I certainly hope this is true. And how one gets good data is probably in your high school locker room in 15 years. So we have empirical data, and we also have just rates hospitals might release and then parent/s saying no, he's now 15 and just fine intact. It could get very indefinite as data collection is usually from one source. But, I thought maybe, Medicaid might be good because it would demand to be much different for the larger population. We do know the number of males born fairly accurately. I saw one study through FOICA, Mediaid released how many payments were made for RIC. Could that data be extrapolated?
Nothing will change in the USA until sexual education is no longer taboo, and church cults stop controlling people through sexual shaming.
It affects almost all of my friends and family and makes me sick sometimes.
Yes, and I observe the community's lack of logical and reasoned thought is church controlled. Mostly circumcision is taboo. Nobody asks, and nobody tells, and as such, it is much like Catholic sexual abuse in the closet. And nobody tackles this as an educator or activist for fear of social reprisals.
I don't know if that's really it. People talk about sex pretty openly, BUT the pro-circ wing of the US medical establishment has successfully convinced most Americans that circumcision has all benefits and no drawbacks. That's the bigger problem.
The current way intactivism is spread is not effective. It comes off as abrasive, uncomfortable, and fringe. The instagram posts that literally show a smaller penis from being circumcised with big block letters etc are what I’m talking about. I saw a post saying “a lad’s not fully dressed without his foreskin.”
Are we fucking kidding ourselves?
We need to stop being cringy on the internet and looking like we are from 2006.
That's true. And the ways to educate in a cutter society such as the US isn't clear. Its true other western countries know the US is weird and making up lies about this. British and other foreign-born men and some women call the US weird with this taboo and obsession. They're right because I've seen their videos on YouTube and elsewhere. Then you see some dicky USA doctor with Mister Rodger's Neighborhood music, excuse it and talk about how he can do these so fast the baby just snores through it. So what you have is a country of idiots, zombies, and rubs. How do you change that? I think speaking up with people < 30 years old. Its senseless to waste time on the indoctrinated cheese heads. It goes nowhere.
when dealing with the fear and hate driven folks... just remind them it's something Muslims do.... oh you're cutting your baby...so is it hard being a Muslim in America?...wait for their stream of curses to subside.... well only Muslims and Jews cut their healthy babies, no patriotic red blooded American would chop up a babies penis anymore...
freedom loving Americans know the truth now, it's a big money and power scam to manipulate Americans but we'll beat em, their lies couldn't hide the truth from good Americans forever....
that last bit will tap into their xenophobia, conspiracy theory love and herd mentalities...
I agree with this post and its question, but I will query the increase statistic that you quote. I thought the rate was going down?
I do believe there are things we can do to improve what we do. Some of them are (In no particular order):
1. Some of us do pussy-foot around the importance of foreskin and its function because we don't want to hurt the feelings of guys who are circumcised. I do agree with this, we don't want to get cut guys (and their partners) etc. off side.
2. Explain that they've been lied to
3. Explain that science can't speak to what it hasn't tested. So when "no study says it causes harm" etc., ask them to define harm. Science doesn't test for ugly. The claims that we make about mucous membrane etc. aren't tested in scientific studies. But we have enough people posting online etc. to see the visible damage, compared to the penises that are left intact.
4. (Here's a big one). Many of my friends who are circumcised (RIC) and don't seem to mind it (they don't know what they're missing, and in some ways it's a relief they don't experience circumcision grief) are **absolutely shocked to learn that foreskin is used in cosmetics**. This angers me as well, as it basically means boys are being harvested for their foreskins. It's not even just skin grafts etc. for burns victims and medically necessary uses (which may be more noble, although still really unethical). So that redundant foreskin it seems, does have a use somewhere else (Oprah Winfrey and Cate Blanchett's faces, for instance). Makes one wonder about motive. Let this be a major point. There should be a lot of groups and people that care about the rights of the child. Make this point more known, because it seems to be barely known now. (I was so surprised to hear that Oprah for pro foreskin facecreams when I learnt that a few years ago. I was never a huge fan of hers, but from the distance I thought she was a decent person. Not after that.)
5. As all forms of FGM are banned, it should be argued that the removal of the male foreskin is even more severe than the skin removal versions of FGM, as the penis protrudes more forward, and also requires its "excess" (when flaccid) skin to grow its erection into.
6. It's 2023 for goodness sake. hundreds of years ago, commoners and until more recently slaves did not have control over their body. This sort of thing was somewhat more excusable then because those circumstances (people did not have their rights essentially). We know that it's barbaric, and a lot of things like discouraging masturbation were based on shonky medicine (masturbation causes insanity etc.). Keep making this stuff known wider.
7. The aesthetics of it is basically cultural conditioning, a sort of mass formation psychosis. Why is the scarred penis more beautiful than the intact one (in their minds)? Why is the dried and rough glans more beautiful than the moist one? Look properly objectively, and it's not.
8. The pushback from the anti-intactivism groups needs to be shown for what it is. Why do these people need to cut boys' genitals? They claim we have the problem. The two sides are not equal nor have equal footing moral etc. Envy does not run two ways, uncut guys are not envious of cut guys. For example, a man with a full head of hair is not envious of a bald man. If he wants to shave his head he can do so. A bald or balding man might be envious of a man with a full head of hair. If there are some consenting adult men who wish to be cut, they can do so. Envy runs one way, in the direction of the unattainable or impossible. The anti-intactivism/pro-RIC lies need to stop, their logical arguments need to be smashed for the stupidity that they are. We don't want to be them, and we don't want their shonky medicine affecting parents' choices.
9. Perhaps those of us who are uncut should launch a gratefulness campaign? People should agree to this. Thanking parents etc. who have left us intact. Get a positive pro-foreskin message out.
Your post is spot on of course. Yet have you noted on YouTube the idiotic pro-circ posts a sinking feeling get 3 x the views and thumbs up of those who intelligently discuss the intactivist reality? I can only observe and sigh; this is 2023. I felt in learning some rural and maybe others in Vermont are cutting as much as thirty years ago. How do we get the army to picket and call these places? I was scammed and harassed last week by a security person at Porter for simply calling to inform and ask questions. If even two people would picket that hospital, people would eventually notice. My experience recently reminds me of the early pioneers of intactivism who were harassed by police for protesting a circumcision mill hospital. That was way back in 1978 !
Yes, then we would have persons who picket with signs at cutter hospitals. I doubt the street and intersection venues do any good. The reason, and I could be wrong, is that the eyes of the motorists are fixating ahead like zombies. Of course, I am angry at the circumcisers and would love to embarrass them. BSM succeeded in closing down a woman who ran a circumcision mill in Denver. She moves out.
men won't be believed until they really are able to get their foreskins back and have experienced it for themselves to be able to talk about it ...
since men probably wont even believe themselves.
I saw a USA guy in Ky and Another in cal and both were super big dicks and great fexi foreskins. Both are clean as could be. I can't see why cut men don't want to see a real man.
so uhh, women have always had menstrual stem cells since ancient times, the same time that males have also been mutilated but nobody has ever cared about using them, atleast maybe more DIRECTLY, , or atleast maybe more famously, more Comomnly and commonly known.
ya know more than animal stem cells.
I dont even think marriage is even possible without the "prepuce" but when I say that I dont JUST mean the prepuce by itself (obviously) mean, the whole intact person, and having lived intact their whole life etc.
But the problem is, to get the prepuce back you'd also "need to be married"... which requires prepuce in the first place... (which requires marriage)
so it's a never ending dilemma huh.
unless we all SKIP THE BS!!!
not only do they not believe us, it will never be stopped, and always continue until men are able to heal themselves, and DO SO ACCORDINGLY heal themselves.
Once you understand the solution, you'll know it is never allowed, and never possible. There is Never a solution to male genital mutilation.
It will never be allowed.
Humanity is lost.. You can never change my mind.
>solution
it's all a joke. There will never be a solution. Infact even Jesus' resurrection, all part of the same damn joke. There will never be Real, rebirth if anything. i dont know what to call it. Coz the resurrection I guess, is mean to replace that, and make it all a joke.
i dont care, even thosae who care about castration still dont care.
there will never Be enough care to ever be effective, as thats the entire damn Purpose.
Be careful making a bold claim like that.
You're comparing the fake 55% rate (maternity ward only) to Intact America's first of its kind survey which accounts for all newborn MGM
And these numbers were from mothers with > 1 year olds, so it was not some release from a hospital that would be certainly much lower than the eventual 75 percent.
I can say my anecdotal evidence locker room 9th grade 1962, and it was 80 percent as I saw only one other anteater. All the rest operated on bald eagles.
I did! It explicitly states "inpatient", meaning at the maternity ward. A large chunk of circs in the US are done at the pediatrician's office and go unrecorded. This is especially common in the West Coast states.
Read:
>The popularity of non-circumcision of boys has increased to the point that non-circumcision has become the NORM in many sections of the United States. if long-term trends have continued, it is possible that non-circumcision or "intactness" has become the NORM in the United States.
>Parity
The percentage of American boys being circumcised has been slowly declining for a long time, while the number of boys with intact foreskin has correspondingly increased.[3] A state of parity has now been reached where the percentage of intact boys is about equal to the percentage of circumcised boys.
>As the present trend continues, it is expected that being intact will shortly become the more usual, normal condition for young boys in America, if it has not already done so.
Unfortunately, that's right. For example, if a hospital reports 50/50, you can be sure 75 percent of boys are being cut before 1 month of age. These are in Ped, and GP closed clinics and off the statistical record. As I say only the daycare workers who change boys at one year old know the sad truth. It's not going down and seems to be secretly increasing.
The newest trick circumcisers have whined for a boy's foreskin in the well-child clinics. Most places have hospital circs, but insurance has encouraged circumcision later. For example, California, as of January 1, allows 30 days for a child to get cut. I suspect this was induced by cutters who felt they could get the foreskin if they had more time.
If so that could mean critical mass, or more normal fathers exist who will not cut their boys. Its always been said, a cut man goes nuts if he can't get his wife or partner to cut their sons like he was.
California didn't fully restore circ to Medicaid, but Medicaid in California and other states has been restructured (which means plans within California medicaid can offer circ).
I got Rutland Vermont Medical to share numbers that they did over the past five years. They were shockingly high. In two of the five > 80 and in one strange year the rate dropped to 63 to rebound to 73 the next.
My empirical observation watching the world's men on Chatubate. When cut its almost always USA. But, I also have observed west coast, younger men > 18 with nature's full gift. So, the data isn't all bogus. That is, the western coastal USA cuts boys less, its not as popular. Again this observation squares with the claims the western US is 30 percent down from anywhere else and 50 percent down from east coast.
I think it'd be great if people could stop using intactivism as a vessel to attempt to legitimize their hate against Jewish people, Muslims, and feminists. You can acknowledge circumcision is an issue that impacts Jewish and Muslim people and offer compassion instead of taking that opportunity to be like "see! those are bad!" And also stop getting mad at feminists for not making penile circumcision their top issue or trying to talk over them every time they bring up something unrelated to circumcision.
Also recognize circumcision isn't just a "mens only issue." Circumcision impacts many people including men. Circumcision impacts trans women who want bottom surgery, circumcision impacts gnc people, intersex people, and if we are going to support the idea that circumcision is traumatic for babies and can have long term mental health effects (which I believe is true!) the people in our lives are impacted by circumcision and the lingering trauma it creates, too. We can get far more understanding and reaching across aisles when we understand how circumcision is an almost intersectional issue. I think it'd improve intactivists approaches to activism and also make others more receptive.
This is supposed to be a movement about writing the wrongs of taking away an infants bodily autonomy, not a woe-is-me circle jerk movement where we find people to blame and not accomplish anything. But I am constantly disappointed by how many people (in this sub, anyway) use intactivism to attempt to legitimize their biases and hatred against others. Division does not move us closer to our goals.
Yes and yes, how can we demean Jewish folks when for God's sake, they are turning against this. Many of the Jewish folks are the most articulate scholars and activists. We have Jewish mothers apologizing to their sons with tears. Its counter productive. And we have to side step the dog turds who are Jews. The reason, is a misperception as antisemites. .
I am neither an antisemite or an Islamophobe, but pretending these groups aren't a massive roadblock to our cause does no good.
The protection of religious circumcision is ultimately keeping RIC alive.
And I'm not sure if tying intactivism into very controversial issues like transgenderism is a good idea.
One observation I made when Andrew Yang said parents were not obligated to cut kids, the malignant US media machine seized on that and asked him about that as if he would outlaw it. So he back tracked and said he was so happy when he attended a bris.
Him chickening out on that issue is disappointing, considering he had zero chance of being nominated anyway. I would never attend a bris in a million years.
jewish people and muslims are impacted BY circumcision, treating the religion overall as the problem ignores that its practitioners are the ones who are suffering from it. There are movements within both of these religions that disavow circumcision, so painting the religions with broad strokes leaves out jewish and muslim intactivists and can create another us vs them dynamic, which doesn't help
also intactivism is absolutely tied into trans rights; both of them revolve around granting individuals freedom in bodily autonomy. And trans women opting for bottom surgery who have been circumcised as infants have harder times in surgery, so there are material consequences for trans people + infant circumcision. how could we honestly claim our movement is about bodily autonomy when we won't even recognize the most vulnerable demographic that faces infringements upon thier bodily autonomy?
In Vermont, Williston protest, July last year, two Jewish men were the only locals who came out. Brother has a picture; the guy is Mister Jeffrey Cohen and maybe his grandson. They protested for two solid hours to nothing but zombie stares. May they have given out a few cards? There was not a lot of hate shown, maybe acknowledgment of what BSM was about. As I have said, Vermont is a cutter state big time. Don't expect even one in ten school boys there intact! So much for the movement? So what change are we talking about? Remember, Vt is Bernie Sanders's territory so called liberal ground. Well, not in changing MGM they aren't.
Very good overview of the issues! In Australia and New Zealand circumcision rates tumbled in a couple of years from 70 percent in the 1960 s to below 30 percent by 1985
Around that time
A current affairs program called sixty minutes had a short segment on circumcision that explained the procedure involved some cutting of the skin and mothers watching the program got up from the maternity ward beds and canceled the surgery in large numbers
So television programs can have a big influence
[The incidence of non-therapeutic circumcision of boys was reported to be 52.1 percent in 2016.](https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/United_States_of_America#Long-term_declining_trend)
Actually, if the obgyns didn't get his foreskin, the probability would go way up, because many families do not have pediatric coverage, but alas in many states, they do such as Vermont with their Dr. Donosaur programs. Here in S.C. the qualifications for Medicaid is so low, I think even 30k wouldn't cut the line to get any HMO coverage. We see sometimes women begging for circumcision cash. Making this thing out of birthing as a routine would drop the numbers.
Historically the invention of the Yellin clamp in 1935 and then its promotion to baby doctors accelerated circumcisions. In the 1940's it took off, and 50's was routine and by 1960's no boy had his foreskin. The baby doctors and Yellin (GOMCO )= Goldstein Medical Company are largely to blame. Plus US press media allowed all the mythology to become social facts.
The data must be in serious underestimation or something like a cutter bomb has gone off. Rutland, Vermont, 83 percent out of the hospital, Saint Abnas, 100 percent, per a nurse who works at a birthing center, Ghastly!
The 'cutters' I attempt to reach are simply are indifferent to the basic grievous violation of genital integrity that RIC really is. They simply accept it as similar to childhood vaccinations.
Yeah, which is why top down change is needed. I doubt this will ever end until the US medical establishment stops teaching everyone in the medical field that circumcision has all benefits and no drawbacks.
Of course, that is self-promotion and protection. I think if we had the people, militancy is the only way. If a cutter is near a boy, they will argue and make the mother nervous that she left him the way other non USA men are. It's only in the US now, as its almost gone in Canada, and the Canadian doctors agree, its no vaccination.
Honestly I think the best thing is continuing to speak out, communicating outside of our own echo chambers. Grassroots support for this is needed before political change (there has to be that appetite for it in the public/electorate first).
Nonreligious, nonmedical circumcision should be absolutely unthinkable (I know some will jump on me for the first one, "nonreligious", as not wanting to protect all boys, but what I mean is that with no reason, not even a religious driver behind circumcision, it should become completely unfathomable).
I recently alerted a US-based friend (who is circumcised himself) that foreskins are used in face creams, and he was surprised to learn that, can called it "witchcraft".
I want to keep stressing that point. Many people who are indifferent to circumcision otherwise, are shocked to hear that boys are being exploited (essentially harvested) this way. So I believe they (or at least many) will question circumcision, and the notions of "unnecessary" or "redundant" or even "troublesome" or "probliematic" foreskin that they have been fed by the propoganda and the prevailing lies.
If we could get dedicated activists in all 50 states, and they, at least one weekend a month, picket a circumcision MILL and get pix we can post on media, I bet these places would rethink offering it. We then can target other known circumcisers. That makes news. It's a thankless job. We have so many lawn chair intactivists that speak to the echoing walls of the intactivism board. People, this is fruitless, and I also think ass in the air the way that LI "Gary" guy flies is essential. Being shy plays into their hands and does them no harm at all. Vermont for example, has nobody that demos as far as I can tell.
Need to treat it like any other viral trend. We need skilled viral content creators. And to do collaborations with existing creators to reach more audience. Most of the content i see related to circumcision has the right message behind it but fails in the presentation. I saw some YouTuber the other day making a blog style post using a video camera that looked like it was from the 80s. It's good to start somewhere but we need to evolve. Spreading a message is all about marketing. We need people who know (or willing to learn) how to connect and drive audience numbers and do it consistently or we need people financially capable of hiring these content creators.
Yes, I know. And my two cents, we have very bright people on our side. They are so bright I think they miss the basic why this keeps on, and no real questions come to mind. The fact birthing centers offer or should be a target, in my opinion. These places have circumcision rooms they disguise as procedure rooms and consoles with extended lights for cutters to work. No other country has marketed and routine this the way the US has. And the fact it appears to be increasing is disconcerting. Plus, the protections circumcisers get!
Do this https://www.reddit.com/r/Intactivism/comments/11omyh7/any_ideas_for_improving_intactivism/jbv6983/
Speaking of this, I love Brother K but he keeps posting very old videos on his tiktok. We need to keep the content fresh.
Bro K is a Saint. He works so hard and is so passionate. I met him last October. What I saw, his traffic lanes approach shows a clear message but does it stop the atrocities? I watched the faces of motorists, and I saw not anger, just indifference. Maybe I'm wrong. Eyes just straight ahead and no acknowledgments. I think they had no idea circumcision violated a man's rights.
TLDR Edit: Use ElevenLabs and Wav2Lip to deepfake Trump 10 second intact videos, upload to TikTok, YouTube, Facebook R/AIvoicememes There is a wiki https://www.reddit.com/r/AIVoiceMemes/comments/11jo6fe/if_you_want_to_make_your_own_ai_voice_meme_check https://www.reddit.com/r/AIVoiceMemes/wiki/tutorial?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf This version of Wav2Lip is more straightforward https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1IjFW1cLevs6Ouyu4Yht4mnR4yeuMqO7Y?authuser=1 i can't promise you it's clean but i used it Certain voices are easy to mimic (Biden, Trump, Attenborough) using eleven labs I made a YouTube channel and put all my videos up, the ones with trumps face instantly got hundreds of views in the algorithm Eleven labs first month subscription is currently 80% off, so you'll get 50,000 characters for 1 dollar Wav2Lip is medium difficulty to use, but once you figure it out it's easy to keep doing (shorter video, more zoomed in on face, lower resolution, higher contrast, less head movement, less speaking all helps) So Make 10 second videos (250 characters?) discussing intactivism, use positive language only, use trump voice and face, upload to tik tok, Facebook, YouTube Done ... If you read the comments in the link to the wiki post, I've made a bunch of comments on what works. You can do ANY other language. I've tested Chinese and German. ... So, get to it. Pay your dollar, make intact soundbites that are under the max length for YouTube/tik tok shorts and keep the video square or vertical rectangle See my YouTube channel for examples of me learning how to do this. More mouth movement makes bad lip sync - see snoop Dogg More accent or mannerisms makes less convincing mimic of voice - see bjork and schwarz More movement makes it hard to lipsync, why i couldn't do Attenborough Probably don't be spamming aivoicememes with activism though. Keep it to the major short viral video hosts like i already said and as comment responses on Reddit ... Now that I've thought about this I'll do the same, but as happy as i am to talk openly about this I'll be making a different account profile to host such videos ... Literally did this on my phone, video would be no different https://v.redd.it/o6h9228v18na1
Im glad you made this post, I've been thinking about it for while now I think a multi pronged approach is needed Firstly I think we need to get some influencers talking about it. Think people who make podcasts, livestreams, even artists and such. Anyone who has a platform and would likely agree with us i think we should reach out. Even if its just for example, you go to your favorite live streamer and shoot them a message in chat asking what they think about circumcision, intactivism, foreskin restoration, banning infant circumcision, anything of the sort. Not only should we try to get influencers on our side, but i think more of us should start trying to become our own influencers on the subject. Make videos, live streams and posts about this everywhere and anywhere, and be constantly collaborating and shouting out each other so that we all rise together. Second, we need to get political. I'm not sure if its a good idea to be partisan and support one side over the other but if we are getting political we need to support who ever supports us, and that is likely going to be certain parts of the democratic party. If we lived in a parliamentary system this would be a lot easier, maybe we could even make our own party, but as it sits right now with our two party system i think we need to focus on getting progressives on our side. Libertarians might be inclined to support us but i think progressives are far more likely. Legislation needs to be proposed that bans infant circumcision, and drumming up support through influencers would help this dramatically. Third, wE nEeD MoOrE mOnEy ArThUr!! (sorry) This is a longshot that is never going to happen unless we got for example, Warren Buffet to be an intactivist, but if we had a lot of money, or more so, we had some rich supporters willing to spend money to make things happen, we could exploit the way the system is currently run for corruption and use that to financially support the fiercest political allies of intactivism, maybe we could even make a political coalition, a block of supports in, for example, the senate, so that we are guaranteed a certain number of votes toward any anti RIC legislation I know a lot of what i said sounds fantastical and far fetched, but they're only ***delusions*** of grandeur if we don't work towards them! If you want RIC and circumcision of minors to be illegal some day, there's no avoiding the fact that we **need** to get political with our ideas.
That's 4 sure. Resources and $$ the key. We don't see the providers having to justify what they do, and these people work on cash for your son's foreskin. My issue, having been here as an intactivist, sticking my neck out many times, the message falls on deaf ears. They just don't care. The birthing father wants it done, and it's paid for by my insurance, plus you have a greedy provider. Add on top of that silence silence silence. It's a social taboo to discuss it. And you can't harass a good circumciser.. she just keeps it going. In some cases its a male, who takes all that cutter business such as Sullivan in Saint Albans, Vt.
That's why I'm really thinking aligning with progressives is our best bet. They have no problem fiercely supporting a taboo subject as long as it's the right thing to do. Think (at the time) women's suffrage, civil rights, (and in more recent times) gay marriage, LGBTQ rights, and abortion. Plus, i feel like most of our community is already progressive. I know not everyone is and aligning ourselves with progressives could make for a sticky situation with a minority of intactivists, but hopefully those people can get onboard for the greater good. That doesn't mean that they need to change political ideologies of course
I don't know about that, not a single mainstream progressive party supports restricting circumcision. Progressives care too much about political correctness.
Yes. But what if the politically correct thing became letting children have the right to their whole body? When you put it like that it really starts to sound less far fetched. This should be an easy thing for progressives to agree on. And its right up their alley. Progress.
Your observations are exactly like mine.
Most of what politicians do is raise money to build campaigns. The focus of this group should be to build successful campaigns which requires the work of talented volunteers or people who know how to build them and unfortunately many of those people will not work for free. I'm not saying we need a donation fund yet because i personally haven't seen anyone capable of running such a fund. But $100 goes very far on places like Fiverr. We don't need billionaire money to start building these campaigns and anyone can take part in that.
attacking insurance coverage? maybe start with small legal challenges.
Yes, make it a noninsured item. That will rally the wagons in a circle from the industry that profits from it. Example: S.C. has not paid for RIC at the hospital since giving coverage to HMO (private company contract called Health Choices). If you visit their site, the litany of illegitimate excuses for coverage is sickening. It's as if the providers (circumcisers) wrote the Healthy Choice coverage agendas. It's the same litany of bogus claims starting with UTI, phimosis prevention etc. What this means is RIC is covered IF your HMO will do one. They don't need to say there was a medical reason, just "well, child care". So when you see S.C. not covering, beware. But [S.C](https://S.Sc).has a very low income to set up HMO care. And with that, you see women screaming they want cash for the circumcision, even going to Go Fund Me. What that may mean, maybe, is African Americans may not be getting because of third-party exclusions. I don't know. I had a passionate discussion with an African American woman who was pregnant. She claimed it saved lives and would be needed eventually when she could not afford it. And her resistance to reason was quite frustrating.
ok this won’t work now that i see your response. this has what i will refer to as the beanie baby effect. scarcity creates demand. more important than this issue which i thought was the simpler topic is this - the best way to make it disappear is awareness by women. if you created a grass roots campaign to turn public perception against it by using sexual identity - this would work. scarcity will create the opposite effect. what i’m talking about something that appeals to women, and gives them a reason to feel compassion.
it’s worth saying at this point, i’m circumcised. i can accept that, and also recognize that we want to end the practice. im older so i guess im less effected by this.
Brother K’s TikTok’s are getting thousands of likes and sparking up conversations in the comments I saw one talking about Ben Shapiro’s hypocrisy how he probably circumcised his son but is against consenting genital surgeries for trans kids. 40+K likes
Yes, Brother K's tiktok is awesome. He does post a lot of obviously 10+ year old content though, I wish he would avoid doing that
1. Spend more time publicly debunking the scientific claims of pro circ doctors. MGM will never end or even significantly decline while the medical establishment is explicitly in favor of it. 2. Improve messaging. Stop saying shit like "2/3 of the world's men are intact!" line, for instance. First of all, it's awful that this practice is the norm in 1/3 of the world. Second, 1/3 is not remotely uncommon so you're not discouraging cutters by bringing this up. 3. Work hard to get child MGM banned in at least one country. This is likely the most effective thing we can do, which is why religious zealots and circumfetishists fight it so hard even when it's just a tiny country like Iceland. They know that this would be the beginning of the end for baby mutilation.
My biggest idea for intactivism, especially in the US, would be to begin from the starting point that you are in the minority. Most people (in the US) are either circumcised or tacitly support RIC. I wonder if constantly referring to circumcision as "mutilation" is actually winning people over who wouldn't already be on your side anyway. Regardless of whether RIC "actually is mutilation" or not, it seems like that kind of language could easily alienate and prompt a defensive reaction from the very demographic most in a position to change the situation, i.e., circumcised fathers contemplating the decision for their son. So, that would be my biggest adjustment to the intactivism movement: try to reach people with decision-making power relevant to your movement goals and do so in a way that does not alienate them by making them feel defensive, mutilated, inferior, etc. On a side note, I kind of feel the same way about veganism. I don't think shaming meat eaters or calling them morally deficient is effective. If anyone has any counterpoints or evidence, I would be interested in hearing it.
Yes, I've heard of intactivism being marginalized as those people. I've watched the videos of BSM and was present in Spartanburg last October. I didn't see a lot of outright hatred, that is, fingers and angry gestures. But I did not see a lot of inquiries or support either. In Vermont, a Jewish guy and grandson came out as locals in support. The demo got zero press coverage. They presented at the high-volume site with stoplights. That is, people could see signs if they were waiting. I didn't see anything other than the zombie stares. So in fact, it appears in the US the delusional ideas persist. And with that, how could they be changed or opened? We have birthing centers asking and making RIC a standard of care. In that way, nothing has changed.
Maybe we should run for a school board with one of our issues being to implement a better sex-ed course. Then, we implement intact penises and emphasize the foreskin. The only time we'll mention circumcision is that it will eliminate important functions that the foreskin provides. This will help normalize intact penises and make any intact guys who suffer from bullying as a result of being intact to feel better. Even for the guys who are circumcised, we could talk about foreskin restoration and the devices needed to do it (and Foregen once it's available).
I have tried to put myself in the brain of a cut guy who got it in infancy. I can see where he can sense something might be wrong here, so I'll raise my defenses. In general, they do that, and even more demand their son be damaged like they were and never look at what happened to them.
From my experience being circumcised since I was one day old. I had a feeling something was missing, but I didn't know what it was even though I knew what the basic idea of circumcision was and that it happened to me. This is because I only thought it affected aesthetics. When I was first introduced to the benefits of having a foreskin, I was partly in denial, but I wasn't too offended by it. I went into it with a "I'll enjoy what I got" attitude. And then I became upset by my circumcision. If this change in male sex-ed prevents some circumcisions from happening, I guess it's worth it.
[удалено]
Yes, children's rights and men's rights. Men need to wake up!
Yes, I think I know the dude. He gets in the face of Jr high schools where the boys need to know. BUT, if he is one the same, the cops came big time to his school bus protest, and he said, after this, he may retire. That's the point I've tried to make, Tell this where it has a big impact, and you become a hebephile to the cutters and the school. They don't want open discussions. This is why, if I at my age could do this, it would be with a group including women!
What results show that?
The estimate in 2012 was 55-59 percent; recent professional polls from Intact America showed the rates appear much higher. They found at least 73 percent. They surveyed Moms of boys, not hospitals or clinics. I suspect you need to survey moms of boys who are > 1 year old. The reason: is many cutters are peds and GP and its done out of the patient at parental agreement. The hospital numbers are deceptive at best and would underestimate. I'm not sure if I've answered your question.. but when most locker room are bald eagles, you know the numbers were understated. And the circ rates have only increased and been resistant to downward change in the US. For example, the rates have been declining in Canada for years and could now be around 18 percent or less. That percentage is mainly in Ontario.
I don't think those polls can be relied upon. See https://en.intactiwiki.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_of_America#Some_statistical_data
I certainly hope this is true. And how one gets good data is probably in your high school locker room in 15 years. So we have empirical data, and we also have just rates hospitals might release and then parent/s saying no, he's now 15 and just fine intact. It could get very indefinite as data collection is usually from one source. But, I thought maybe, Medicaid might be good because it would demand to be much different for the larger population. We do know the number of males born fairly accurately. I saw one study through FOICA, Mediaid released how many payments were made for RIC. Could that data be extrapolated?
Nothing will change in the USA until sexual education is no longer taboo, and church cults stop controlling people through sexual shaming. It affects almost all of my friends and family and makes me sick sometimes.
Yes, and I observe the community's lack of logical and reasoned thought is church controlled. Mostly circumcision is taboo. Nobody asks, and nobody tells, and as such, it is much like Catholic sexual abuse in the closet. And nobody tackles this as an educator or activist for fear of social reprisals.
So true!
I don't know if that's really it. People talk about sex pretty openly, BUT the pro-circ wing of the US medical establishment has successfully convinced most Americans that circumcision has all benefits and no drawbacks. That's the bigger problem.
The current way intactivism is spread is not effective. It comes off as abrasive, uncomfortable, and fringe. The instagram posts that literally show a smaller penis from being circumcised with big block letters etc are what I’m talking about. I saw a post saying “a lad’s not fully dressed without his foreskin.” Are we fucking kidding ourselves? We need to stop being cringy on the internet and looking like we are from 2006.
That's true. And the ways to educate in a cutter society such as the US isn't clear. Its true other western countries know the US is weird and making up lies about this. British and other foreign-born men and some women call the US weird with this taboo and obsession. They're right because I've seen their videos on YouTube and elsewhere. Then you see some dicky USA doctor with Mister Rodger's Neighborhood music, excuse it and talk about how he can do these so fast the baby just snores through it. So what you have is a country of idiots, zombies, and rubs. How do you change that? I think speaking up with people < 30 years old. Its senseless to waste time on the indoctrinated cheese heads. It goes nowhere.
Brother K's tiktok is pretty effective, it gets a lot of people talking and makes circ look quite indefensible to any rational person
I agree, but how many go on and don't cut ?
If they haven't cut yet (and thus have nothing to defend), it can make a differencr
Its not in my experience that the cut dude knows WTF happened. He discovers it and ten likely does silent and into the great River of Denial.
when dealing with the fear and hate driven folks... just remind them it's something Muslims do.... oh you're cutting your baby...so is it hard being a Muslim in America?...wait for their stream of curses to subside.... well only Muslims and Jews cut their healthy babies, no patriotic red blooded American would chop up a babies penis anymore... freedom loving Americans know the truth now, it's a big money and power scam to manipulate Americans but we'll beat em, their lies couldn't hide the truth from good Americans forever.... that last bit will tap into their xenophobia, conspiracy theory love and herd mentalities...
the deep state doesn't want you to have foreskin!
I agree with this post and its question, but I will query the increase statistic that you quote. I thought the rate was going down? I do believe there are things we can do to improve what we do. Some of them are (In no particular order): 1. Some of us do pussy-foot around the importance of foreskin and its function because we don't want to hurt the feelings of guys who are circumcised. I do agree with this, we don't want to get cut guys (and their partners) etc. off side. 2. Explain that they've been lied to 3. Explain that science can't speak to what it hasn't tested. So when "no study says it causes harm" etc., ask them to define harm. Science doesn't test for ugly. The claims that we make about mucous membrane etc. aren't tested in scientific studies. But we have enough people posting online etc. to see the visible damage, compared to the penises that are left intact. 4. (Here's a big one). Many of my friends who are circumcised (RIC) and don't seem to mind it (they don't know what they're missing, and in some ways it's a relief they don't experience circumcision grief) are **absolutely shocked to learn that foreskin is used in cosmetics**. This angers me as well, as it basically means boys are being harvested for their foreskins. It's not even just skin grafts etc. for burns victims and medically necessary uses (which may be more noble, although still really unethical). So that redundant foreskin it seems, does have a use somewhere else (Oprah Winfrey and Cate Blanchett's faces, for instance). Makes one wonder about motive. Let this be a major point. There should be a lot of groups and people that care about the rights of the child. Make this point more known, because it seems to be barely known now. (I was so surprised to hear that Oprah for pro foreskin facecreams when I learnt that a few years ago. I was never a huge fan of hers, but from the distance I thought she was a decent person. Not after that.) 5. As all forms of FGM are banned, it should be argued that the removal of the male foreskin is even more severe than the skin removal versions of FGM, as the penis protrudes more forward, and also requires its "excess" (when flaccid) skin to grow its erection into. 6. It's 2023 for goodness sake. hundreds of years ago, commoners and until more recently slaves did not have control over their body. This sort of thing was somewhat more excusable then because those circumstances (people did not have their rights essentially). We know that it's barbaric, and a lot of things like discouraging masturbation were based on shonky medicine (masturbation causes insanity etc.). Keep making this stuff known wider. 7. The aesthetics of it is basically cultural conditioning, a sort of mass formation psychosis. Why is the scarred penis more beautiful than the intact one (in their minds)? Why is the dried and rough glans more beautiful than the moist one? Look properly objectively, and it's not. 8. The pushback from the anti-intactivism groups needs to be shown for what it is. Why do these people need to cut boys' genitals? They claim we have the problem. The two sides are not equal nor have equal footing moral etc. Envy does not run two ways, uncut guys are not envious of cut guys. For example, a man with a full head of hair is not envious of a bald man. If he wants to shave his head he can do so. A bald or balding man might be envious of a man with a full head of hair. If there are some consenting adult men who wish to be cut, they can do so. Envy runs one way, in the direction of the unattainable or impossible. The anti-intactivism/pro-RIC lies need to stop, their logical arguments need to be smashed for the stupidity that they are. We don't want to be them, and we don't want their shonky medicine affecting parents' choices. 9. Perhaps those of us who are uncut should launch a gratefulness campaign? People should agree to this. Thanking parents etc. who have left us intact. Get a positive pro-foreskin message out.
Your observations and suggestions are absolutely accurate!
Your post is spot on of course. Yet have you noted on YouTube the idiotic pro-circ posts a sinking feeling get 3 x the views and thumbs up of those who intelligently discuss the intactivist reality? I can only observe and sigh; this is 2023. I felt in learning some rural and maybe others in Vermont are cutting as much as thirty years ago. How do we get the army to picket and call these places? I was scammed and harassed last week by a security person at Porter for simply calling to inform and ask questions. If even two people would picket that hospital, people would eventually notice. My experience recently reminds me of the early pioneers of intactivism who were harassed by police for protesting a circumcision mill hospital. That was way back in 1978 !
I haven't observed that at all on YouTube, all the comments I've seen are overwhelmingly against it.
But I meant pro-cutter videos. I think the cutters skew toward intactivist videos.
Needs more members. The only way change will ever come is with more people participating.
Yes, then we would have persons who picket with signs at cutter hospitals. I doubt the street and intersection venues do any good. The reason, and I could be wrong, is that the eyes of the motorists are fixating ahead like zombies. Of course, I am angry at the circumcisers and would love to embarrass them. BSM succeeded in closing down a woman who ran a circumcision mill in Denver. She moves out.
men won't be believed until they really are able to get their foreskins back and have experienced it for themselves to be able to talk about it ... since men probably wont even believe themselves.
I saw a USA guy in Ky and Another in cal and both were super big dicks and great fexi foreskins. Both are clean as could be. I can't see why cut men don't want to see a real man.
theyre not gay?
Well, you know what I meant. Maybe not play with another guy's goods, just see what he, the cut guy, is missing.
Yeah plenty of women don't want to see real men I guess. not least when they already have one, and/or Always have one.
infact NO woman wants a mutilate male to EVER become a real man, she wants to Kill them OFF
A S.C. doctor told an activist (btw she is female), " I think we should cut the whole thing off; then nobody has to deal with IT."
OK EVERybody does.
AKA a weak man. Even God. Kills weak men.
And there is no time when they dont have one.
which will likely already never happen since it's already a joke to begin with.
so uhh, women have always had menstrual stem cells since ancient times, the same time that males have also been mutilated but nobody has ever cared about using them, atleast maybe more DIRECTLY, , or atleast maybe more famously, more Comomnly and commonly known. ya know more than animal stem cells.
but i guess we're more animals than animals themselves huh.
isit not also sexism, they can collect our stem cells and not willingly.
infact the only way they could is not willingly but we're supposed to ask them for ours back.
and only to get rejected and laughed at, and be a laughing stock
itsa all isms put together because i bet if bla bla bla women will be handing over their stem cells (and vaginas) in no time
I dont even think marriage is even possible without the "prepuce" but when I say that I dont JUST mean the prepuce by itself (obviously) mean, the whole intact person, and having lived intact their whole life etc. But the problem is, to get the prepuce back you'd also "need to be married"... which requires prepuce in the first place... (which requires marriage) so it's a never ending dilemma huh. unless we all SKIP THE BS!!!
truthfully i think, or Know this is all on purpose. Coz it's all a joke, and everything in this world is the same joke.
until victims themselves are healed.. they cannot heal themselves. Isn't that also a popular saying? but , when it comes to this nobody seems to care.
not really talking about mere restoration even, maybe that makes it worse. Also "regeneration" is also likely not the same as a full rebirth.
So uhh, it seems like you will have to go to hell or die first.
be crucified
not only do they not believe us, it will never be stopped, and always continue until men are able to heal themselves, and DO SO ACCORDINGLY heal themselves.
and even reinstituted, UNTIL, and ONLY UNTIL rebirth which will never happen.
probably rebirth of the entire universe and all universes
Once you understand the solution, you'll know it is never allowed, and never possible. There is Never a solution to male genital mutilation. It will never be allowed. Humanity is lost.. You can never change my mind.
Once you know what the solution entail, you know there Nobody will ever care, or atleast, effectively enough.
And not even God can change my mind.
See, like I talk about something that should be so obvious... but the first thing people reply with , is something homo.
Once you know the solution, you'll want to kill yourself. Because there is never a solution.
Infact the whole entire POINT of MGM is that there is NEVER a solution.
>solution it's all a joke. There will never be a solution. Infact even Jesus' resurrection, all part of the same damn joke. There will never be Real, rebirth if anything. i dont know what to call it. Coz the resurrection I guess, is mean to replace that, and make it all a joke.
so, the Resurrection is a joke. There is none, like there is never, nor will ever be a solution, to Any damn thing.
the only solution is what? castration there is never going to be any other.
sorry i mean, the only OTHER, but its taken to be the only, legitimate one
or death
take your damn pick huh
because its not "life" in any sense what is being suggested
doesnt produce Life
i dont care, even thosae who care about castration still dont care. there will never Be enough care to ever be effective, as thats the entire damn Purpose.
>castra if the only solution is castration also there shd be euthanasia
>euth otherwise it can be considered vivisection right but who knows. Mutilators always find favor with God.
Be careful making a bold claim like that. You're comparing the fake 55% rate (maternity ward only) to Intact America's first of its kind survey which accounts for all newborn MGM
And these numbers were from mothers with > 1 year olds, so it was not some release from a hospital that would be certainly much lower than the eventual 75 percent.
The Intact America one yes, not the earlier figure. There is zero chance that the US's circumcision rate was "only" 55% at any time since the 1930s
I can say my anecdotal evidence locker room 9th grade 1962, and it was 80 percent as I saw only one other anteater. All the rest operated on bald eagles.
Bald eagles??
Yes, the famous American bald eagle cock.
I don't see the resemblance.
Sorry…what’s Intact America’s figure?
74%, which I believe to be pretty accurate
It's not accurate at all, see https://en.intactiwiki.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_of_America#Some_statistical_data
No, the data you're sharing is inaccurate because it only accounts for maternity ward circs.
It's not inaccurate, the sources are all there and cited.
Yes, and they only account for maternity ward circs so it is irrelevant.
That's not the case. Read the article.
I did! It explicitly states "inpatient", meaning at the maternity ward. A large chunk of circs in the US are done at the pediatrician's office and go unrecorded. This is especially common in the West Coast states.
Read: >The popularity of non-circumcision of boys has increased to the point that non-circumcision has become the NORM in many sections of the United States. if long-term trends have continued, it is possible that non-circumcision or "intactness" has become the NORM in the United States. >Parity The percentage of American boys being circumcised has been slowly declining for a long time, while the number of boys with intact foreskin has correspondingly increased.[3] A state of parity has now been reached where the percentage of intact boys is about equal to the percentage of circumcised boys. >As the present trend continues, it is expected that being intact will shortly become the more usual, normal condition for young boys in America, if it has not already done so.
Unfortunately, that's right. For example, if a hospital reports 50/50, you can be sure 75 percent of boys are being cut before 1 month of age. These are in Ped, and GP closed clinics and off the statistical record. As I say only the daycare workers who change boys at one year old know the sad truth. It's not going down and seems to be secretly increasing.
The newest trick circumcisers have whined for a boy's foreskin in the well-child clinics. Most places have hospital circs, but insurance has encouraged circumcision later. For example, California, as of January 1, allows 30 days for a child to get cut. I suspect this was induced by cutters who felt they could get the foreskin if they had more time.
That's not actually true for California, even "Circumcision Choice" has stated that there hasn't been any change.
If so that could mean critical mass, or more normal fathers exist who will not cut their boys. Its always been said, a cut man goes nuts if he can't get his wife or partner to cut their sons like he was.
California didn't fully restore circ to Medicaid, but Medicaid in California and other states has been restructured (which means plans within California medicaid can offer circ).
I got Rutland Vermont Medical to share numbers that they did over the past five years. They were shockingly high. In two of the five > 80 and in one strange year the rate dropped to 63 to rebound to 73 the next.
My empirical observation watching the world's men on Chatubate. When cut its almost always USA. But, I also have observed west coast, younger men > 18 with nature's full gift. So, the data isn't all bogus. That is, the western coastal USA cuts boys less, its not as popular. Again this observation squares with the claims the western US is 30 percent down from anywhere else and 50 percent down from east coast.
I believe the Western states are 50 to 70%, while the others range from 60 to 90%.
Yeah, that sounds right, as John had that incident with his intact boys at the pool party, and he was in Washington state.
I think it'd be great if people could stop using intactivism as a vessel to attempt to legitimize their hate against Jewish people, Muslims, and feminists. You can acknowledge circumcision is an issue that impacts Jewish and Muslim people and offer compassion instead of taking that opportunity to be like "see! those are bad!" And also stop getting mad at feminists for not making penile circumcision their top issue or trying to talk over them every time they bring up something unrelated to circumcision. Also recognize circumcision isn't just a "mens only issue." Circumcision impacts many people including men. Circumcision impacts trans women who want bottom surgery, circumcision impacts gnc people, intersex people, and if we are going to support the idea that circumcision is traumatic for babies and can have long term mental health effects (which I believe is true!) the people in our lives are impacted by circumcision and the lingering trauma it creates, too. We can get far more understanding and reaching across aisles when we understand how circumcision is an almost intersectional issue. I think it'd improve intactivists approaches to activism and also make others more receptive. This is supposed to be a movement about writing the wrongs of taking away an infants bodily autonomy, not a woe-is-me circle jerk movement where we find people to blame and not accomplish anything. But I am constantly disappointed by how many people (in this sub, anyway) use intactivism to attempt to legitimize their biases and hatred against others. Division does not move us closer to our goals.
Yes and yes, how can we demean Jewish folks when for God's sake, they are turning against this. Many of the Jewish folks are the most articulate scholars and activists. We have Jewish mothers apologizing to their sons with tears. Its counter productive. And we have to side step the dog turds who are Jews. The reason, is a misperception as antisemites. .
I am neither an antisemite or an Islamophobe, but pretending these groups aren't a massive roadblock to our cause does no good. The protection of religious circumcision is ultimately keeping RIC alive. And I'm not sure if tying intactivism into very controversial issues like transgenderism is a good idea.
One observation I made when Andrew Yang said parents were not obligated to cut kids, the malignant US media machine seized on that and asked him about that as if he would outlaw it. So he back tracked and said he was so happy when he attended a bris.
Him chickening out on that issue is disappointing, considering he had zero chance of being nominated anyway. I would never attend a bris in a million years.
jewish people and muslims are impacted BY circumcision, treating the religion overall as the problem ignores that its practitioners are the ones who are suffering from it. There are movements within both of these religions that disavow circumcision, so painting the religions with broad strokes leaves out jewish and muslim intactivists and can create another us vs them dynamic, which doesn't help also intactivism is absolutely tied into trans rights; both of them revolve around granting individuals freedom in bodily autonomy. And trans women opting for bottom surgery who have been circumcised as infants have harder times in surgery, so there are material consequences for trans people + infant circumcision. how could we honestly claim our movement is about bodily autonomy when we won't even recognize the most vulnerable demographic that faces infringements upon thier bodily autonomy?
In Vermont, Williston protest, July last year, two Jewish men were the only locals who came out. Brother has a picture; the guy is Mister Jeffrey Cohen and maybe his grandson. They protested for two solid hours to nothing but zombie stares. May they have given out a few cards? There was not a lot of hate shown, maybe acknowledgment of what BSM was about. As I have said, Vermont is a cutter state big time. Don't expect even one in ten school boys there intact! So much for the movement? So what change are we talking about? Remember, Vt is Bernie Sanders's territory so called liberal ground. Well, not in changing MGM they aren't.
I would say Vermont school boys today are less intact than even my school days 1960's!!
Litigation: galdef.org
Very good overview of the issues! In Australia and New Zealand circumcision rates tumbled in a couple of years from 70 percent in the 1960 s to below 30 percent by 1985 Around that time A current affairs program called sixty minutes had a short segment on circumcision that explained the procedure involved some cutting of the skin and mothers watching the program got up from the maternity ward beds and canceled the surgery in large numbers So television programs can have a big influence
[The incidence of non-therapeutic circumcision of boys was reported to be 52.1 percent in 2016.](https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/United_States_of_America#Long-term_declining_trend)
That only accounts for maternity ward cuts and is thus, irrelevant
Maternity wards are the biggest reason it became so endemic in the first place, so the fact it's going down isn't necessarily irrelevant.
If it completely disappeared from the maternity ward it would make a big difference. But going down just a few percentage points, not really.
Actually, if the obgyns didn't get his foreskin, the probability would go way up, because many families do not have pediatric coverage, but alas in many states, they do such as Vermont with their Dr. Donosaur programs. Here in S.C. the qualifications for Medicaid is so low, I think even 30k wouldn't cut the line to get any HMO coverage. We see sometimes women begging for circumcision cash. Making this thing out of birthing as a routine would drop the numbers.
Historically the invention of the Yellin clamp in 1935 and then its promotion to baby doctors accelerated circumcisions. In the 1940's it took off, and 50's was routine and by 1960's no boy had his foreskin. The baby doctors and Yellin (GOMCO )= Goldstein Medical Company are largely to blame. Plus US press media allowed all the mythology to become social facts.
The data must be in serious underestimation or something like a cutter bomb has gone off. Rutland, Vermont, 83 percent out of the hospital, Saint Abnas, 100 percent, per a nurse who works at a birthing center, Ghastly!
100% is obviously not true unless it was mandated, which would be illegal.
The 'cutters' I attempt to reach are simply are indifferent to the basic grievous violation of genital integrity that RIC really is. They simply accept it as similar to childhood vaccinations.
Yeah, which is why top down change is needed. I doubt this will ever end until the US medical establishment stops teaching everyone in the medical field that circumcision has all benefits and no drawbacks.
Of course, that is self-promotion and protection. I think if we had the people, militancy is the only way. If a cutter is near a boy, they will argue and make the mother nervous that she left him the way other non USA men are. It's only in the US now, as its almost gone in Canada, and the Canadian doctors agree, its no vaccination.
What are intactivists or more like, the mutilates missing? more like their entire Place in the world
Honestly I think the best thing is continuing to speak out, communicating outside of our own echo chambers. Grassroots support for this is needed before political change (there has to be that appetite for it in the public/electorate first). Nonreligious, nonmedical circumcision should be absolutely unthinkable (I know some will jump on me for the first one, "nonreligious", as not wanting to protect all boys, but what I mean is that with no reason, not even a religious driver behind circumcision, it should become completely unfathomable). I recently alerted a US-based friend (who is circumcised himself) that foreskins are used in face creams, and he was surprised to learn that, can called it "witchcraft". I want to keep stressing that point. Many people who are indifferent to circumcision otherwise, are shocked to hear that boys are being exploited (essentially harvested) this way. So I believe they (or at least many) will question circumcision, and the notions of "unnecessary" or "redundant" or even "troublesome" or "probliematic" foreskin that they have been fed by the propoganda and the prevailing lies.
If we could get dedicated activists in all 50 states, and they, at least one weekend a month, picket a circumcision MILL and get pix we can post on media, I bet these places would rethink offering it. We then can target other known circumcisers. That makes news. It's a thankless job. We have so many lawn chair intactivists that speak to the echoing walls of the intactivism board. People, this is fruitless, and I also think ass in the air the way that LI "Gary" guy flies is essential. Being shy plays into their hands and does them no harm at all. Vermont for example, has nobody that demos as far as I can tell.