u/CarterSteinhoff

"The Husband Stitch" is a feminist short story about the domestic oppression of women. In the story, after the women gives birth in the hospital her body is in shock, and she's barely conscious. As the male doctor stiches back up her vagina that got torn during birth, he mentions to the husband to not worry, and that he'll be adding one additional stitch, making the vagina more tight than it ever was before. The woman is too delirious to object. This is the "husband stitch" that gives the story it's name.

The story is all about women being seen as sex objects by their husbands, to the point men will literally physically modify their bodies without their consent to improve the male sexual experience.

This is my exact experience as a circumcision victim. I didn't have the husband stitch, but I sure did have the wife snip. What is one of the most commonly cited reasons given for circumcision? "Girls like it".

The parallels are uncanny. "The Husband Stitch" is a great short story. But it left out an important detail. It left out what was going on in the hospital in the next room over at the exact same time the women was getting the husband stitch. At that very same moment, the child that the woman gave birth to was getting penetrated and genitally mutilated by a female doctor one door down, to appease female sexual preference.

They waited until both of us were traumatized and defenseless to treat us like the sex objects that we are. The women went through the trauma of giving birth, and the child through the trauma of being born. And both had oppressive objectifying penetrative physical changes made to their body when they were most defenseless, to please the other gender, maybe even at the very same moment.

The truth is that the world has been enforcing objectifying standards on both genders for a long while. The only difference is that "The Husband Stitch" gets it's own short story and is now fully illegal, where as the "The Wife Snip" is a story that isn't even allowed to get told, and snipping males because "girls like it" is still legal and happens thousands of times per day.

Women have used their social justice capital irresponsibly. The world has been enforcing rape-y sex negative non-consensual medicalized genital modifications onto both genders for thousands of years. But the women decided it would be acceptable to leave men entirely out of the narrative, and to make you believe that only women can be victims of a "Husband Stitch". Women are not the only victims. I was a victim of the "Wife Snip". Where's my short story? As the mom got her "Husband Stitch", I was in the other room getting my "Wife Snip", and nobody even cared enough to write my story.

Routinely/ritually amputating highly erogenous and functional genital tissue from an infant is the most egregious of violations imaginable. For most men genitally mutilated as children, it is the most painful and distressing period of their lives and can cause long term physiological and neurological negative consequences along with diminished sexual function and sensation and oftentimes the sexual loss is quite profound due to how much tissue is amputated.

It is sincerely something that men could justify starting a war over. It's a straight up atrocity of the highest possible order.

One would think that this sensationally violent sexual battery would be discussed more in spaces like this given how widespread this practice is and how many people are impacted by it.

I can't understand why the topic isn't dominating men's rights groups.

In the United States, there are many men with a radical amount of their foreskin amputated in infancy.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were 50+ million men that were cut to a CI-2 and below with partial or full frenulum/frenular delta loss.

In case you didn't know, the entire inner foreskin, not even just the frenulum, can be stimulated alone to orgasm. It's so obviously part of the core sexual sensory tissue on a man's penis that it defies all reason how it could have even been seen differently. We should be looking at the surface area of the glans and the inner foreskin as similarly important in terms of sexual sensory sensation.

It's more than reasonable to be utterly distraught over this anatomical loss.

We are left with scars halfway down our shafts, a majority of the highly erogenous inner tissue amputated, all the mucosal membranes exposed, and a taut, immobile skin system. It's ghoulish and morbid how sexually disabling this reality is for many of us.

It's wildly unacceptable how even in these spaces we are being gaslit and diminished by other "Intactivists". We need to start coordinating and mobilizing around how to combat these people.

https://preview.redd.it/mbooopeyrrjh1.png?width=2031&format=png&auto=webp&s=695d688676f4e7c9d467d7491a515f9fab7e42ad

https://preview.redd.it/wm0mvhb0srjh1.png?width=2072&format=png&auto=webp&s=cbec311582df3d81eb4c3edea140b04c9a7ceae2

Foreskin amputation of children is an unfathomable atrocity and there are men who are going to suffer terribly their entire lives over this. These communities and the larger public better get used to us.

The publicly available video/photographic evidence that some Intactivists have witnessed paints a very grim picture of the degree of trauma that infants experience during this violent mutilation of their penis. In many instances, the victims of this were genitally mutilated with little to no local anesthetic and suffer for weeks afterward from early infancy penile trauma. For most men who were genitally mutilated as infants, this is the most traumatic and severe trauma of their lives happening during a critical time of physiological and neurological development.

This is radically severe sexual battery of a juvenile and all logic and reason would lead one to believe that this can result in a range of long term psychological and psychosexual consequences in many instances.

To the men that run their mouth in pain and suffering, I want you to know that I'll stand by your side to the final breath. I know this prison you're in. We can strive to heal but still be suffering in a devastating way.

The "intactivists" that trivialize and diminish you are outright unsympathetic fools that have no business being here.

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

I hate the way so many people diminish the foreskin and make it out to be an unnecessary and diseased part of male sexual anatomy. It’s fucking rotten to speak down in disgust at something so important. The foreskin is a critical and core structure for sexual pleasure and sexual function.

This anatomy should be celebrated as a major driver of male sexual pleasure and not demonized and amputated away from children.

It’s batshit insane how there is such a phobia around an intact penis.

Intactivism should also be focusing on radical restorative justice for the victims of a severe form or rape and felony sexual battery that left us permanently sexually diminished and with long term psychological/nervous system trauma.

The fact that there isn’t any significant momentum around restorative justice I think strongly speaks to a larger gender based issue on how men perceive themselves and how society perceives them.

For most men who identify as victims of this, being genitally mutilated as a juvenile was the most damaging and traumatic experience of their entire life and it happened during a critical window of development.

We are 100% justified in demanding that the government and society invest in a long term “truth and reconciliation” process for condoning and participating in the atrocity of mass genital mutilation of male children.

The foreskin is a structure that seems to have largely evolved for sexual pleasure and function.

I don't find it rational to be indifferent or feel positive about the amputation of this anatomy. Most people who feel this way just delude themselves and insist that the foreskin has no purpose or erogenous sensation. How could this not be a delusion when it is an inversion of reality?

Someone who could think this way has such a wildly different psychological profile than me. Foreskin amputation screams out as a sensational sensory and functional loss.

The difference in psychology is so profound that I think it begins to make sense to separate the identities of these two groups of people.

I want my identity to be separated someone who feels indifferent or positive about foreskin amputation maybe in a similar way to how non-trans and trans identity is separated.

Many infant boys in the United States were subjected to a severe form of male genital mutilation where around half the tissue on their penis was amputated, a majority portion of the erogenous tissue, and they partially or fully lost their frenulum. A straight up skinning of the entire erogenous penile sheath.

The functional and sensory loss is so severe that it presents as a sexual disability.

Intactivism doesn’t have many graphics/animations that capture this anatomical loss yet. I think it’s a major missing piece in presenting our argument.

The male foreskin is a foundational component of male sexual anatomy and has significant sexual function and erogenous capacity.

Restraining a neonate, intruding into their penis, and amputating the foreskin is flagrant felony sexual battery and a form of rape. There is lifelong sexual loss associated with this and it causes profound early infancy penile trauma that can negatively shape the trajectory of neurological development.

This is one of the most egregious human rights violations happening on men and it’s estimated that around 3000 male infants are being genitally mutilated every day in the U.S. alone.

I’m sincerely shocked this isn’t discussed more in this space and other men’s rights spaces given how wicked and damaging it is.

I’m curious to hear any feedback on why this still seems like such an underground topic even in spaces dedicated to men’s issues